{"id":684,"date":"2013-07-13T01:29:42","date_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:29:42","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/?p=684"},"modified":"2013-07-13T01:29:42","modified_gmt":"2013-07-13T01:29:42","slug":"04-nature-of-the-absolute-brahman-vol-12-the-upanishad-volume-12","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/01-works-of-sri-aurobindo\/01-sabcl\/12-the-upanishad-volume-12\/04-nature-of-the-absolute-brahman-vol-12-the-upanishad-volume-12","title":{"rendered":"-04_Nature of the Absolute Brahman.htm"},"content":{"rendered":"\n\n
\n


\nTWO<\/span> <\/span><\/b><\/p>\n


\nNature of the
\nAbsolute Brahman<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n


\n            v<\/span>iewed
\n<\/span><\/b>in the light of these four great illuminations the
\nutterances of the Upanishads arrange themselves and fall into a perfect harmony.
\nEuropean scholars like Max M\u00fcller have seen in these Scriptures a mass of
\nheterogeneous ideas where the sublime jostles the childish, the grandiose walks
\narm-in-arm with the grotesque, the most petty trivialities feel at home with the
\nrarest and most solemn philosophical intuitions, and they have accordingly
\ndeclared them to be the babblings of a child humanity; inspired children, idiots
\nendowed with genius, such to the Western view are the great Rishis of the
\nAranyaka. But the view is suspect from its very nature. It is not likely that
\nmen who handle the ultimate and most difficult intellectual problems with such
\nmastery, precision and insight, would babble mere folly in matters which require
\nthe use of much lower faculties. Their utterances in this less exalted sphere
\nmay be true or they may be erroneous, but, it may fairly be assumed, they gave
\nthem forth with a perfectly clear idea of their bearing and signification. To an
\nunderstanding totally unacquainted with the methods by which they are arrived
\nat, many of the established conclusions of modern Science would seem unutterably
\ngrotesque and childish, \u2014 the babblings if not of a child humanity at least of
\nhumanity in its dotage; and yet only a little accurate knowledge is needed to
\nshow that these grotesque trivialities are well-ascertained and irrefragable
\ntruths.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nIn real truth the Upanishads are in all their parts, allowing
\nfor imaginative language and an occasional element of sym\u00adbolism, quite
\nrational, consistent and homogeneous. They are not concerned indeed to create an
\nartificial impression of consistency by ignoring the various aspects of this
\nmanifold Universe and reducing all things to a single denomination; for they are <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 8<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\nnot metaphysical treatises aiming at mathematical
\nabstractness or geometrical precision and consistency. They are a great store of
\nobservations and spiritual experiences with conclusions and generalisations from
\nthose observations and experiences, set down without any thought of
\ncontroversial caution or any anxiety to avoid logical contradictions. Yet they
\nhave the consistency of all truthful observation and honest experience; they
\narrange themselves naturally and without set purpose under one grand universal
\ntruth developed into a certain number of wide general laws within whose general
\nagreement there is room for infinite particular variations and even anomalies.
\nThey have in other words a scientific rather than a logical consistency.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nTo the rigorous logician bound in his narrow prison of verbal
\nreasoning, the Upanishads seem indeed to base themselves on an initial and
\nfundamental inconsistency. There are a number of passages in these Scriptures
\nwhich dwell with striking emphasis on the unknowableness of the Absolute
\nBrahman. It is distinctly stated that neither mind nor senses can reach the
\nBrahman and that words return baffled from the attempt to describe It; more \u2014
\nthat we do not discern the Absolute and Transcendent in Its reality, nor can we
\ndiscriminate the right way or perhaps any way of teaching the reality of It to
\nothers; and it is even held, that It can only be properly characterised in
\nnegative language and that to every challenge for definition the only true
\nanswer is neti neti, It is not this. It is not that.<\/i> Brahman is not
\ndefinable, not describable, not intellectually knowable. And yet in spite of
\nthese passages the Upanishads constantly declare that Brahman is the one true
\nobject of knowledge and the whole Scripture is in fact an attempt not perhaps to
\ndefine, but at least in some sort to characterise and present an idea, and even
\na detailed idea, of the Brahman.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nThe inconsistency is more apparent than real. The Brahman in
\nIts ultimate reality is transcendent, absolute, infinite; but the senses and the
\nintellect, which the senses supply with material, are finite; speech also is
\nlimited by the deficiencies of the intellect; Brahman must therefore in Its very
\nnature be unknowable to the intellect and beyond the power of speech to
\ndescribe, \u2014 yet only in Its ultimate reality, not in Its aspects or
\nmanifestations<\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 9<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\nThe Agnostic Scientist also believes that there must be some
\ngreat ultimate Reality unknown and probably unknowable to man (ignoramus et
\nignorabimus)<\/i> from which this Universe proceeds and on which all phenomena
\ndepend, but his admission of Unknowableness is confined to the ultimate Nature
\nof this supreme End and not to its expression or manifestation in the Universe.
\nThe Upanishad, proceeding by a profounder method than material analysis, casts
\nthe net of knowledge wider than the modern Agnostic, yet in the end its attitude
\nis much the same; it differs only in this important respect that it asserts even
\nthe ultimate Brahman to be, although inexpressible in the terms of finite
\nknowledge, yet realisable and attainable.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nThe first great step to the realisation of the Brahman is by
\nthe knowledge of Him as manifested in the phenomenal Uni\u00adverse; for if there is
\nno reality but Brahman, the phenomenal Universe which is obviously a
\nmanifestation of something <\/i>permanent and eternal, must be a manifestation
\nof Brahman and of nothing else, and if we know it completely, we do to a certain
\nextent and in a certain way know Him, not as an Absolute Existence, but under
\nthe conditions of phenomenal manifestation. While, however, European Science
\nseeks only to know the phenomena of gross matter, the Yogin goes farther. <\/b>
\nHe asserts that he has discovered an universe of subtle matter penetrating and
\nsurrounding the gross; this universe to which the spirit withdraws partially and
\nfor a brief time in sleep but more entirely and for a longer time through the
\ngates of death, is the source whence all psychic processes draw their origin;
\nand the link which connects this universe with the gross material world is to be
\nfound in the phenomena of life and mind. His assertion is perfectly positive and
\nthe Upanishad proceeds on it as on an ascertained and indisputable fact quite
\nbeyond the limits of mere guess-work, inference or speculation. But he goes yet
\nfarther and declares that there is yet a third universe of causal matter
\npenetrating and surrounding both the subtle and the gross, and that this
\nuniverse to which the spirit withdraws in the deepest and most abysmal states of
\nsleep and trance and also in a remote condition beyond the state of man after
\ndeath, is the source whence all phenomena take their rise. If we are to
\nunderstand the Upanishads <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 10<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\nwe must accept these to us astounding statements, temporarily
\nat least; for on them the whole scheme of Vedanta is built. Now Brahman
\nmanifests Himself in each of these Universes, in the Universe of causal matter
\nas the Cause, Self and Inspirer, poetically styled, Prajna the Wise One; in the
\nuniverse of subtle matter as the Creator, Self and Container, styled
\nHiranyagarbha the Golden Embryo of life and form, and in the universe of gross
\nmatter as the Ruler, Guide, Self and Helper, styled Virat the Shining and mighty
\nOne. And in each of these manifestations He can be known and realised by the
\nspirit of man.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nGranted the truth of these remarkable assertions, what then
\nis the relation between the Supreme Self and man ? The position has already been
\nquite definitely taken that the transcendent Self in man is identically the same
\nas the transcendent Self in the Universe and that this identity is the one great
\nkey to the knowledge of the Absolute Brahman. Does not this position rule out of
\ncourt any such differences between the Absolute and the human Self as is implied
\nin the character of the triple manifestation of Brahman? <\/b>On the one hand
\ncompletest identity of the Supreme Self and the human is asserted as an
\nascertained and experienced fact, on the other hand widest difference is
\nasserted as an equally well-ascertained and experienced fact; there can be no
\nreconciliation between these incompatible statements. Yet are they both facts,
\nanswers Vedanta; identity is<\/i> a fact in the reality of things; difference
\nis<\/i> a fact in the appearance of things, the world of phenomena; for
\nphenomena are in their essence nothing but seemings and the difference between
\nthe individual Self and the Universal Self is the fundamental seeming which
\nmakes all the rest possible. This difference grows as the manifestation of
\nBrahman proceeds. In the world of gross matter, it is complete; the difference
\nis so acute, that it is impossible for the material sensual being to conceive of
\nthe Supreme Soul as having any point of contact with his own soul and it is only
\nby a long process of evolution that he arrives at the illumination in which some
\nkind of identity becomes to him conceivable. The basal conception for Mind as
\nconditioned by gross matter is Dualistic; the knower here must be different from
\nthe known and his whole intellectual development consists in the discovery, <\/span><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 11<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\ndevelopment and perfected use of ever new media and methods
\nof knowledge. Undoubtedly the ultimate knowledge he arrives at brings him to the
\nfundamental truth of identity between himself and the Supreme Self, but in the
\nsphere of gross phenomena this identity can never be more than an intellectual
\nconception, it can never be verified by personal realisation. On the other hand
\nit can be felt,<\/i> by the supreme sympathy of love and faith, either through
\nlove of humanity and of all other fellow-beings or directly through love of God.
\nThis feeling of identity is very strong in religions based largely on the
\nsentiment of Love and Faith. I and my Father are One, cried the Founder of
\nChristianity; I and my brother man and my brother beast are One, says Buddhism;
\nSt. Francis spoke of Air as his brother and Water as his sister; and the Hindu
\ndevotee when he sees a bullock lashed falls down in pain with the mark of the
\nwhip on his own body. But the feeling of Oneness remaining only a feeling does
\nnot extend into knowledge and therefore these religions while emotionally
\npervaded with the sense of identity, tend in the sphere of intellect to a
\nmilitant Dualism or to any other but always unmonistic standpoint. Dualism is
\ntherefore no mere delusion; it is a truth, but a phenomenal truth and not the
\nultimate reality of things.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nAs it proceeds in the work of discovering and perfecting
\nmethods of knowledge, the individual self finds an entry into the universe of
\nsubtle phenomena. Here the difference that divides it from the Supreme Self is
\nless acute; for the bonds of matter are lightened and the great agents of
\ndivision and disparity, Time and Space, diminish in the insistency of their
\npressure. The individual here comes to realise a certain unity with the great
\nWhole; he is enlarged and aggrandised into a part of the Universal Self, but the
\nsense of identity is not complete and cannot be complete. The basal conception
\nfor mind in this subtle Universe is Dualo-Monistic; the knower is not quite
\ndifferent from the known; he is like and of the same substance but inferior,
\nsmaller and dependent; his sense of oneness may amount to similarity and
\nco-substantiality but not to coincidence and perfect identity.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nFrom the subtle Universe the individual self rises in its
\nevolution<\/span> <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 12<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\nuntil it is able to enter the universe of causal matter,
\nwhere it stands near to the fountain-head. In this universe media and methods of
\nknowledge begin to disappear. Mind comes into almost direct relations with its
\nsource and the difference between the individual and the Supreme Self is greatly
\nattenuated. Nevertheless there is here too a wall of difference, even though it
\nwears eventually thin as the thinnest paper. The knower is aware that he is
\ncoeval and coexistent with the Supreme Self, he is aware of a sense of
\nomnipresence, for wherever the Supreme Self is, there also he is; he is,
\nmoreover, on the other side of phenomena and can see the Universe at will
\nwithout him or within him; but he has still not necessarily realised the supreme
\nas utterly himself, although this perfect realisation is now for the first time
\nin his grasp. The basal perception for Mind in this Universe is Monism with a
\ndifference, but the crowning perception of Monism becomes here possible.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nAnd when it is no longer only possible but grasped? Then the
\nindividual Self entering into full realisation, ceases in any sense to be the
\nindividual Self, but merges into and becomes again the eternal and absolute
\nBrahman, without parts, unbeginning, undecaying, unchanging. He has passed
\nbeyond causality and phenomena and is no longer under the bondage of that which
\nis only by seeming. This is the Laya or utter Absorption of Hinduism, the
\nhighest nirvāna<\/i> or extinction from phenomena of the Upanishads and of
\nBuddhist metaphysics. It is obviously a state which words fail to describe,
\nsince words which are created to express relations and have no meaning except
\nwhen they express relations, cannot deal successfully with a state which is
\nperfectly pure, absolute and unrelated; nor is it a condition which the bounded
\nand finite intellect of man on this plane can for a moment envisage. This
\nunintelligibility of the supreme state is naturally a great stumbling-block to
\nthe undisciplined imagination of our present-day humanity which, being sensuous,
\nemotional and intellectual, inevitably recoils from a bliss in which neither the
\nsenses, emotions nor intellect have any place. Surely, we cry, the extinction or
\nquietude of all these sources and means of sensation and pleasure imply not
\nsupreme bliss but absolute nothingness, blank annihilation. "An error," answers
\nthe<\/span> <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 13<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\nVedanta, "a pitiful, grovelling error! Why is it that the
\nsenses cease in that supreme condition? Because the senses were evolved in order
\nto sense external being and where externality ceases, they having no action
\ncease to exist; The emotions too are directed outwards and need another for
\ntheir joy, they can only survive so long as we are incomplete. The intellect
\nsimilarly is and works only so long as there is something external to it and
\nungrasped. But to the Most High there is nothing ungrasped, the Most High
\ndepends on none for His joy. He has therefore neither emotions nor intellect,
\nnor can he either, who merges in and becomes the Most High, possess them for a
\nmoment after that high consummation. The deprivation of the limited senses in
\nHis boundlessness is not a loss or an extinction, but must be a fulfilment, a
\ndevelopment into Being which rejoices in its own infinity. The disappearance of
\nour broken and transient emotions in His completeness must bring us not into a
\ncold void but rather into illimitable bliss. The culmination of knowledge by the
\nsupersession<\/i> of our divided and fallible intellect must lead not to utter
\ndarkness and blank vacuity but to the luminous ecstasy of an infinite
\nConsciousness. Not the annihilation of Being, but utter fullness of Being is our
\nNirvana." And when this ecstatic language is brought to the touch-stone of
\nreason, it must surely be declared just and even unanswerable. For the final
\nabsolution of the intellect can only be at a point where the Knower, Knowledge
\nand the Known become one. Knowledge being there infinite, direct and without
\nmedia. And where there is this infinite and flawless knowledge, there must be,
\none thinks, infinite and flawless existence and bliss. But by the very
\nconditions of this stage, we can only say of it that it is, we cannot define it
\nin words, precisely because we cannot realise it with the intellect. The Self
\ncan be realised only with the Self; there is no other instrument of realisation.<\/span><\/p>\n

\nGranted, it may be said, that such a state is conceivably
\npossible, \u2014 as certainly it is, starting from your premises, the only and
\ninevitable conclusion, \u2014 but what proof have we that it exists as a reality ?
\nWhat proof can even your Yoga bring to us that it exists ? For when the
\nindividual Self becomes identified with the Supreme, its evolution is over and
\nit does not return<\/span> <\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 14<\/span><\/p>\n

\n
<\/div>\n

\ninto phenomena to tell its experiences. The question is a
\ndifficult one to handle, partly because language, if it attempts to deal with it
\nat all precisely, must become so abstract and delicate as to be unintelligible,
\npartly because the experiences it involves are so far off from our present
\ngeneral evolution and attained so rarely that dogmatism or even definite
\nstatement appears almost unpardonable. Nevertheless with the using of
\nmetaphorical language, or, in St. Paul’s words, speaking as a fool, one may
\nventure to outline what there is at all to be said on the subject. The truth
\nthen seems to be that there are even in this last or fourth State of the Self,
\nstages and degrees, as to the number of which experience varies; but for
\npractical purposes we may speak of three, the first when we stand at the
\nentrance of the porch and look within; the second when we stand at the inner
\nextremity of the porch and are really face to face with the Eternal; the third
\nwhen we enter into the Holy of Holies. Be it remembered that the language I am
\nusing is the language of metaphor and must not be pressed with a savage
\nliteralness. Well, then, the first stage is well within the possible experience
\nof man and from it man returns to be a Jivanmukta, one who lives and is yet
\nreleased in his inner self from the bondage of phenomenal existence; the second
\nstage once reached, man does not ordinarily return unless he is a supreme
\nBuddha, \u2014 or perhaps as a world Avatar; from the third stage none returns, nor
\nis it attainable in the body. Brahman as realised by the Jivanmukta, seen from
\nthe entrance of the porch, is that which we usually term Parabrahman, the
\nSupreme Eternal and the subject of the most exalted descriptions of the Vedanta.
\nThere are therefore five conditions of Brahman. Brahman Virat, Master of the
\nWaking Universe; Brahman Hiranyagarbha, of the Dream Universe; Brahman Prajna or
\nAvyakta of the Trance Universe of Unmanifestation; Parabrahman, the Highest; and
\nthat which is higher than the highest, the Unknowable. Now of the Unknowable it
\nis not profitable to speak, but something of Parabrahman can be made
\nintelligible to the human understanding because,\u2014 always if the liberal use of
\nloose metaphors is not denied, \u2014 it can be partially brought within the domain
\nof speech.<\/span> <\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

\nPage \u2013 15<\/span><\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

TWO  Nature of the Absolute Brahman               viewed in the light of these four great illuminations the utterances of the Upanishads arrange themselves and…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-684","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-12-the-upanishad-volume-12","wpcat-14-id"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/684","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=684"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/684\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=684"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=684"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/worksofthemotherandsriaurobindo.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=684"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}