Katha Upanishad; Shankara Bhashya: Valli 4, Mantra 4 and 5.

AS introduces
atisukshmatvat durvijneyam iti matvaitamevartham punarpunaha aaha

atisukshmatvat Since this Atma tattvam is extremely subtle - not in terms of size - but in the sense of not being available for sensory perception indriya agocham - hence durvijneyam - extremely difficult to comprehend as it is unobjectifiable. iti matva considering this difficulty on the part of the student punah punah Acharya - Lord Yama - repeatedly talks about the same teaching. Repetetition is the Universal trait of every Vedanta Acharya.

Mantra 4
Svapnantam jagratitancha cha ubaou yena anupashyati
Mahantam vibhumatmanam matva dheero na sochati

In the previous mantra Atma is revealed through drk drshya viveka. IN this mantra Atma is revealed through avastha traya viveka by an analysis of the three states of experience. We can make 2 conclusions - it is consciousness principle - the witnessood reveals sentiency of atma - and indirectly it also means it is Different from avasthatrayam - because witness is different from witnsessed. Once you say this body also falls under witnessed. Sthula shareeram is not available in svapna and sushupti and falls. Sukshma shareeram is not available in jagrat. All theses shareerams being mutually exclusive Atma has to be other than them. Thus consciousness being the nonvariable factor and the avasthas being mutually exclusive and the bodies coming under the variable factors - consciousness is different
Kaivalyam - trishudhamasu yatbhogyam bhokta yascha ...tebhyoh vilakshana sakshi chinmatroham sadashiva. In each avastha there is a triputi and triputi in one avastha does not persist in the other and I who am the witness of the triputi am different from them. IN this mantra only 2 avasthas are mentioned - 3rd - i.e. sushupti we have to supply. Also jnana phalam is metioned - whoever recognizes this atma as myself does not have grief or worry after this knowledge. Second half of this mantra is repetetion of 1.2.22. This is gist of the mantra.

Svapnantam svapnamadhyam svapna vijneyam ityarthaha tatha jagratantam jagrtamadhyam jagrtavijneyancha ubhau svapnajagrtanta yena atmana anupashyati loka iti sarvam pur bhavat

svapnantam is the 1st word in the muam - means svapna madhyam - what is within the svapna avastha. means svapna vikneyam the objects of experience in the svapna. drshya or snubhuta padarthaha which includes even desha kala time and space. WShen svapna desha comes jagrat desha kala disappears and same for kala of course.
tatha moreover jagrantam in the same way - jagrta madhyam = jagrta vijneyam = objects of experience during wake. Ubhau - both of them - svpajagrtaanta - because of Atma the witness consciousness alone - lokaha anupashyati - every living being experiences. Every living being experiences the waking and dream states because of this witness consciousness alone - self-revealing svayam prakashaha and simultaneously reveals others also - technical term is svaparanirvahakatvam - example is of a flame. Flame reveals itself and reveals other objects. iti sarvam pur bhavat - the rest of the sloka is exactly like in the previous mantra. A similar objection like in the previous mantra can be raised and the answer is also the same as in the previous mantra.

tam mahantam vibhumatamanam matvagamya atmabhavena sakshat aham asmi paramatmeti dhiro na shochati
tam mahantam vibhum atmanam (same as in 1.2.22) matva means avagamya - knowing comprehending the above mentioed atma - how? - atmabhavena avagamya - that paramatma I am - as identical with myself - sakshat - aparokshataya - means aham asmi paramatma iti - I am the Paramatma. After this knowlede the discriminative qualified student dhirah na shocati - does not grieve. (BG - gatasun agatasunscha nanu shochanti panditah)

Anvyah:
Yena (sarvaha) svapnantam jagrtantam cha ubhau anupashyati tam mahaantam vibhum atmanam matva dheerah na shochati

Often when talking about knowing the Atma the Up uses the term anupashyati instead of simply saying pashyati - anu indicates that along with the teaching of the Guru and the shastra 0r in line with the teaching of the Guru and the shastra - to indicate the only pramanam for this knowledge is Shastra - no other pramanam has access to this knowledge - therefore the knowledge revealed by the Shastra is final exactly like knowledge obtained sensory perception does not require any further validation - this is the significance of the term anupashyati - shastraupadehsa anusarena...

Mantra 5

ya imam madhvadam veda atmanam jivaman antikaat
eeshanam bhutabhavyasya na tado vijugupsate etadvaitat

Every mantra here is a mahavakya. In 4th mantra also 1st half svapnantam jagrantam cha refers to the tvampada jiva, mahantam vibhum atmanam refers to tatpada the Paramatma...matva refers to the aikyam..Similarly the 5th mantra in this very important section is also a mahavakya
Gist:
Suppose a vedantic student understands this jivatma currently considered to be a karta bhokta etc to be identical with ishana the paramatma by regularly practicing nidhidhyasanam - he does not seek protection from outside.
As a lay person one seeks protection from surrounding people - father mother etc. As a religious person one seeks support from God - both lay person and religious person are samsaris. After going to jnana yoha one doesnt seek protectin neither from the world nor from God. He does not run anywhere for protection - only where threat is there protection is required - atma cant be threatened by anyone. this is called abhayaprapti - one of the definitions of moksha is abhayaprapti. This ekatma - jivatma paramatma joined together is ekatma - this is the atma you wanted to know in all the prior slokas.
Now the bhashyam
ya kaschit imam matpadam karmaphala bhujam jeevam pranadi kalpasya dhaarayitaram atmanam veda vijanati antika antike sameepe ishanam ishitaram bhuta bhavyasya kalatrayasya tad vijananath urdhvam atmanam na vijugupsate na gopayam abhaya praptatvat.

yaha kaschit - Suppose a person - refers to any qualified person (sadhanachatustaya) imam - knows this jiva matpadam is in the phalam - means karmaphalabhujam the experiencer of karmaphala - madhu means honey and refers to karmaphalam. honey is also dear and sought after just like karmaphalam. karma is never loved for its sake - people are engaged in karma for karmaphalam - jivam - pranadi kalapasya dharayitaram - one who holds the prana in the body. jiva the chidabhasa keeps the prana in the physical body - when the jiva wants to quit the body he takes the prana with him.. kalapaha means group of prana etc - etc referring to sense organs, etc. atmanam veda - knows this atma. jivabhute sanatanah..shareeram yadavapnoti..etc jiva is called the holder of the prana in the body. So suppose a person knows - veda = vijanati -such a jivatma - residing where? antikat? - means antike close samipe - in the antahkaranam as the sakshichaitanyam hradaya akashe vartamanam - closes to you...and know the jivatma as what? as ishana - the paramatma. ishana - means ishitaram iti ishanam the Master - the one who sustains, srshti sthitilaya karta - the Master of the past present and future - bhuta bhavyasya - which means all three states of time kalatrayasya - kalateetah the Master of time, not bound or limited by kala (- in 1.2.14 asks this who is beyond time) By this knowledge tatah = tad vijnanat urdhvam - tad jivatma paramatma aikya jnanant na vijugupsate no gopayam icchati he does not look for a savior to protect him.
Before the world being the victimizer, i am the victim and Bhagwan is the savior - this is the mindset. Now the knowledge is I am of a higher order of reality and the world is of a lower order of reality - so the world which is anatma/mithya is incapable of victimizing abhaya praptatvat - he attains self security. (- adrshye anatma ..nilayane...hy evaisha etasminn adrishye anatmye anirukte 'nilayane abhayam pratishtham vindate 'tha so 'bhayam gato bhavati yada hy evaisha etasminn udaram antaram - Taittriya Brahmavalli )

yavat hu bhayam adhyatsta anityam atmanam manyate yavat gopayitum icchati atmanam
As long as one is triangular format the sense of insecurity can never go away - either insecurity centered on myself or insecurtiy centered on pancha anatma possession, profession, family, mind and body - when i am associated with any one of these five anatmas i am in triangular format and the world is a threat and i am vulnerable. yavat as long as atmanam anityam manyate one looks upon oneself as anitya shareeram, jiva is always vulnerable as he is subject to the invisible prarabdha - tavat so long gopayitum atmanam icchati one will always seek sharanagati or shelter outside in some karma or Bhagwan....or somebody or the other.
yada tu advaitam atmanam vijanati tadakim kutovaa gopayitum icchet
etadvaitad iti poorvavat
yada tu On the other hand - nityam advaitam atmanam vijanati one deliberately and through long effort switches the format from triangular to binaery and understands onself to be eternal and nondual - mayyeva sakalam jatam, etc...tada then - kim gopayitum kaha gopayitum icchet-who will try to protect whom and from what? all this is in the realm of duality.In advaitam there is neither protector nor protected nor a threat or source of fear....etadvai tat and this ekatma is the Absolute reality which you wanted to know (anyatra dharmat,etc . ) this has been commented upon before - poorvavat.
Anvyaha
yaha imam antikat [sthitam] matpadam jivam atmanam bhuta bhavyasya ishanam veda saha tatah na vijugumsate.

Nitya/Anitya; Satyam/Mithya - a critical analysis on the absolute nature of reality.

This is a essay written by Shri Subrahmanian an erudie Vedanta scholar.
The world is anitya, but is it mithya?



श्रीगुरुभ्यो नम:

If nitya is satya, anitya is asatya
( If ‘Eternal’ means ‘Real’, ‘Ephemeral’ means ‘ Unreal’)



In Vedanta ‘Truth’ is called Satya. In His commentary to the Taittiriya Upanishad, Acharya Shankara gives a comprehensive definition of ‘Satyam’ while commenting on this term occurring in the Upanishad in the definition of Brahman: ‘Satyam JnAnam Anantam Brahma.’

यद्रूपेण यन्निश्चितं तद्रूपं न व्यभिचरति, तत् सत्यम् । यद्रूपेण यन्निश्चितं तत् तद्रूपं व्यभिचरति, तदनृतमित्युच्यते । अतो विकारोऽनृतम्, ’वाचारंभणं विकारो नामधेयं मृत्तिकेत्येव सत्यम्’, एवं सदेव सत्यम् इत्यवधारणात् ।

//As for satyam, a thing is said to be satyam, true, when it does not change the nature that is ascertained to be its own; and a thing is said to be unreal when it changes the nature that is ascertained to be its own. Hence a mutable thing is unreal, for in the text, ‘All transformation has speech as its basis, and it is name only. Clay as such is the reality.’ (Chandogya Up. 6.1.4), it has been emphasized that, that alone is true that Exists (Ch.Up. 6.2.1)

Also in the commentary to the Gita verse 2.16, the Acharya says:

यद्विषया बुद्धिर्न व्यभिचरति तत्सत्, यद्विषया व्यभिचरति तदसत् …।

[That is said to be Real, of which our consciousness never fails; and that Unreal, of which our consciousness fails.]

A study of these crucial concepts ‘Satyam’ and ‘asatyam’ or ‘anRtam’ is taken up with a view to ascertain their status in Vedanta.

The concept of ‘nitya’ is also inescapable in this study. Nitya or eternal is not divorced from satya for that which is nitya alone is satya as we saw in the Acharya’s definition above. What is nitya? Strictly, as per the above definition, nitya is that which does not undergo the six-fold transformations. This is called ‘ShaD-bhAva-vikArAH’. This comprises of potential existence, birth, growth, transformation, decay and destruction or death. Anything in the world and the world itself is subject to these transformations and therefore does not come under the category nitya and therefore is anitya. As per the reasoning in the definition of the Acharya, that which is anitya, i.e that which is endowed with transformation, has to be termed ‘anRtam’ or ‘asatyam’, unreal.

In the Bhagavadgita 2.14 we have a very interesting definition of anitya, impermanence:

मात्रास्पर्शास्तु कौन्तेय शीतोष्ण-सुख-दु:खदा: ।

आगमापायिनोऽनित्या: तांस्तितिक्षस्व भारत ॥ (२.१४)

[The sense-contacts it is, O son of Kunti, which cause heat and cold, pleasure and pain; they come and go; they are impermanent. Endure them bravely, O descendent of Bharata.] 2.14

Immediately after this, in 2.16 the Lord says:

नासतो विद्यते भावो नाभावो विद्यते सत: ।

उभयोरपि दृष्टोऽन्त: तु अनयो: तत्त्वदर्शिभि: ॥ (२.१६)

[Of the unreal no being there is; there is no non-being of the real. Of both these the truth is seen by the seers of the Essence.]

In 2.17 the Lord uses the term ‘avinAshI’, imperishable, to denote the Atman. In the 2.18 He says the bodies are ‘antavantaH’, that-which-have-an-end. Here again He says the shareerI, the embodied Atman, is nitya, eternal and anaashI, indestructible. In 9.33 the Lord says about the world: anityam asukham imam prApya bhajasva mAm’. ‘Having reached this transient joyless world, do thou worship Me.’

Thus, in the sample from the Gita we find that the body and the world are anitya, perishable, non-eternal. The Atman is nitya, anAshI, eternal, imperishable. Also we saw that there is no being for the unreal and no non-being for the real. This translates into:

That which is Sat is nitya; it never goes out of existence. That which is asat, anitya, has no existence. The Lord does not give anitya the status of sat, reality. How do we know? Anitya, the impermanent, does go out of existence and hence does not come under the category of ‘Sat’. What is not Sat is asat. In the end, only these two categories are there; there is no intermediate entity that is countable.

We get a definition of ‘anitya’: That which has no existence in the beginning and no existence in the end, Agama-apAyI; that which comes and goes out of existence. Closely related to this definition, we have another verse in the Gita:

अव्यक्तादीनि भूतानि व्यक्तमध्यानि भारत ।

अव्यक्तनिधानान्येव तत्र का परिदेवना ॥ २.२८

[Beings have their beginning unseen, their middle seen, and their end unseen again. Why any lamentation regarding them?] 2. 28

The Acharya comments, quoting a very similar sounding/meaning verse from the Mahabharatha, authored by Bhagavan Veda Vyasa, of which the Bhagavadgita itself is a content:

अव्यक्तम् – अदर्शनम् अनुपलब्धि: …तत्र का परिदेवना = को वा प्रलाप: अदृष्ट-दृष्ट-प्रनष्टभ्रान्तिभूतेषु भूतेषु इत्यर्थ: । तथा चोक्तम् – अदर्शनादापतित: पुनश्चादर्शनं गत: । नासौ तव न तस्य त्वं वृथा का परिदेना ॥ [महाभारत स्त्रीपर्व २.१३]

Note: The word ‘adarshanam’ of the commentary is found in the Mahabharata verse also.

All the embodied beings, have an apparent existence only during the period of their stay; before birth and after their death they are not there at all. The Imperishable Atman, however, is always existent. Nitya is Satya. As for the conclusion that anitya is asatya, even though this verse itself is the scriptural authority, we have a verse from the Gaudapada kArika (2.6) that explains this maxim: anitya is asatya:

आदावन्ते च यन्नास्ति, वर्तमानेऽपि तत्तथा ।

वितथै: सदृशा: सन्तोऽवितथा इव लक्षिता: ॥ (२.६)

[That which does not exist in the beginning and in the end is equally so in the present (i. e in the middle). Though they are on the same footing with the unreal, yet they are seen as though real.]

This verse closely runs with the Gita verse and the Mahabharatha verse we saw above. The Lord asks Arjuna: Why do you lament for the (potential) loss of your near and dear ones who, as bodies, were not perceived before their birth and who will not be perceived after their death but are only appearing to exist in the intermediary period? In other words, the Lord is asking Arjuna to examine whether he is justified in grieving for something/someone that does not exist at all. We may recall the definition of what is satya, real, as provided by the Acharya in the Taittiriya Upanishad commentary (quoted at the beginning of this article) and by the Lord in the ‘nAsato vidyate bhAvo’ verse of the Gita, also quoted in the foregoing.

We find that the Lord is merging the meaning of ‘anitya’ of the verse 2.14 into the word ‘asat’ of the verse 2.16. The Acharya concludes the commentary for this latter verse by giving the Lord’s advice to Arjuna in a nutshell:

//You too, Arjuna, adhering to the vision of the Jnanis, shake off grief and delusion, and, being assured that all phenomena (vikaras) are really non-existent and are, like the mirage, mere false appearances, calmly bear heat and cold and other pairs of opposites, of which some are constant and others inconstant in their nature as productive of pleasure or pain.//

After determining the status of the beings, jiva-s, the Lord teaches us the nature of the world in the sequel:

The Lord says in the 15th chapter of the Bhagavad Gita:

Na rUpamasyeha tathopalabhyate

nAnto na chAdirna cha sampratishTha

ashvatthamenam suvirUDhamUlam

asanga-shastreNa dRDhena cChitvA (15.3)

The bhashyam: //…The world’s (samsara’s) form as such is perceived by nobody here; for it is very much like a dream, a mirage, a gandharva-nagara (an imaginary city in the sky) produced by a juggler’s art; indeed, it appears and disappears. It has therefore no finality, no end. [In the absence of knowledge, samsara has no end….like the wrong notion of the illusory snake ends only when the knowledge of the substratum rope arises and not otherwise]. Neither has it any beginning; nobody knows ‘It proceeded from this point’. Its existence, i.e. its nature between the origin and the end, is perceived by none.//

Since the Lord exhorts the mumukshu to develop strong detachment and cut asunder this (tree of) samsara, world, it follows that an end will be there for the samsara due to knowledge. It follows from this that the beginning of samsara/world is only the ignorance pertaining to one's own true nature. Thus, the world/samsara is sustained only by ignorance, avidya. Apart from avidya as its support the world has no existence really. Of course, this avidya, being itself a superimposition on the Chit, Atma, Brahman,has no existence of its own. Knowledge will dispell it.

Again, in the case of the world too, we can apply the rule stated by Gaudapadacharya in the Kaarika quoted in the foregoing. That which has no real existence in the beginning and end, has no real being in the middle too.

Thus, the world, even though agreed upon by us as anitya, ephemeral, an enquiry into the concept of 'anityatva' , ephemerality, leads us to the conclusion that anitya is only asatya. The logic is: that which is dispelled by knowledge has to be asatya/mithya. The examples: a dream, a rope-snake, etc. The experience: Every Jnani, Tattvadarshi, will no longer see a world, being himself free from samsara, but will experience Brahman, Vasudeva, in the place of the world. The Gita itself has several verses to substantiate this.



We conclude this study by noting the following points:

· Nitya is synonymous with Satya. Truth/Real is that which never changes and is eternal.

· Anitya is synonymous with asatya. That which is impermanent is essentially fraught with changes, vikaras, and is therefore asatya. Impermanence is marked by its not being present before its appearance and going out of existence after its destruction. Its seeming existence is only in the intermediary period. It does not enter the category of Satya.

· This is mistaken for real existence and as pointed out by the Lord in 2.28 leads to grief and other pairs of opposites.

· Satya, Truth, Nitya, will never come into existence or go out of existence. It has no non-existence at any period of time.

· Asatya, unreal, anitya, will never have true existence at any point of time.

· The Chandogya Upanishad passages: ‘mRttiketyeva satyam’ (6.1.4) of the example is the yukti pramANam and ‘sadeva… (satyam)’ (6.2.1) of the dArShTantika is the Shruti pramaaNam for the One-only-without-a-second-of-any-kind nature of Sat(yam). The Gita verse 2.16 is the smriti pramanam in this conclusion. Every true Jnani’s experience itself is the anubhava pramaaNam.

· Since ultimately there is Only one, Satyam (nityam), the asatyam (anityam) is written off as non-existent.

· Anityam/asatyam has only a vyavaharika/paratantra existence.

· That which has only a dependent (paratantra) reality, like a rope-snake, has no independent (swatantra) reality of its own.

· Nityam/Satyam is the Sole Paramarthika/Swatantra Reality.

· He who gains a firm conviction of the nature of these two is the Tattvadarshi according to the Lord (Gita 2.16)

· The sole Reality, Sat, is the subject matter of the Chandogya Upanishad 6th chapter, called ‘SadvidyA’.

Om Tat Sat

Kathopanioshad; Shankara Bhashya. Valli 4. Mantra 3

yat vijananat na kincit anyat prarthayante brahmanaha katham tad adhigamaiti uchyate.

AS intro the next mantra. With previous sloka the sadhana portion is over - main sadhana being avoidance of extrovertedness. Herafter actual atmajnana topic is going to come - all the following atma lakshana slokas are v.v.important.
yat vijananat - by knowing that - the atma - kincit anyat - the wise people, the Brahmanas, do not seek prarthayante, anything else. They dont seek the atma also as they have already discovered it as themselves. tad adigama? how should or in what manner should one know that atma. iti uchyate - such an idea is now being discussed.
yena rupam rasa gandham shabdan sparsha evedaiva vijanati kim atra parishishyate etadvaitat

Gist:

Atma has to be recognized as the consciousness principle inherent in the body. Atma is that consciosness principle because of which one is aware of shada sparsa rupa rasa gandha. From this Up conveys that hypothetically if that principle were to be absent the body mind complex will be a inert bindle like a statue. If this inert bundle is sensing the surroundings it is only because of consciousness. Just like a fan rotates only because of the invisible electricity. This alone is tat - that atma tatvam which you wanted to know O Naciketa.

yena vijnanena svabhena atmana rupam rasam gandham shabdansparshancha maithuna maithuna nimittaan sukha pratyayaan bijanati vispashtam janati sarvolokah

The 1st word yena and yetena must be joined together. yetena means aparoksha chaitanya atma. What kind of atma? which is intimately available always as the sentiency or consciousness. yena yetena..vijanan svabhavena atmana - because of the atma which si the nature of consciousness. here vijnana means consciousness. vijnanam can also refer to knowledge - (like in BG jnana-vijnana yoga) Vijnana as knowledge is not universally available - vijnanam as consciousness is universally available. sarvah lokah janati - every living being vijanati vispashtam clearly experiences. Because of atma chaitanyam alone every living being is clearly experiencing rupam rasam etc all the 5 sensory stimuli as well as maithunam the pleasures and pains borne out of contact with sense organs maithuna nimitta sukha pratyayan - experiences of pleasrue and pain borne out of such ontact with the sense objects. (samsparsha bhogah in BG) Each experience maithunam is a contact or intercourse. Consciousness is experienced all the time - that alone is the Atma. The Atma whose very nature is self-evdient consciousness.

nanu naivam prasiddhhi lokasya atmana dehadi vilakshanena aham vijanaamiti dehaadi sanghadoham vijanamiti tu sarvolokovagacchati

Here Up is defning atma as the consciousness principle because of which every living being is experiencing the world - meaning the Up is assuming that there is an independent principle consciousness independent and other than the bodymind complex. This is meaningful only if the world knows that there is a consicousness separate from the body. When we dont have the knowledge that there is a separate consciousness how can you introduce it
nanu - to object - lokasya prasiddhi nasti there is no knowledge for the world for humanity dehadi vilakshanena atmana that there is a atma a consciousness principle different from the body and because of it alone i am experiencing aham bijanami the world. No one is aware of this or such a principle - only if people know of this can you say such a atma is brahman. On the other hand the general conception of the world is aham dehadi sanghata I am the sentient individual consisting of the bodymindcomplex - sarva lokah - avagacchati entire humanity understands in this manner only. this is the objection of the pp.
na tvevam dehadisanghatasyapi shabdadi svarupatvavisheshatvat vijneyatva visheshaacha na yuktam vijnakrtvam
The Up is assuming the student is capable of some independent thinking. Any person can easily come to the conclusion that the bodymind complex by itself can only be jadam or achetanam.
drshyatvam object of experienced bhautikatvam made of pancha bhutas sagunatvam endowed with attributes savikaratvam subject to change aagamapahitvam appear together in jagrat and disappear together in sushupti are the five similar aspects of body and world. So with these 5 hetu we can easily conclude that like the world the body is also jadam. If this body is experiencing the world the sentiency must have come from some other principle adrshyam. On the other hand if the body is sentient by itself why cant the wall or statue also be sentient? That there is such a principle a thinking student will conclude - kene ishitam....?what is that mysterious principle which converts the inert bundle into a sentient one?
tat evam what you say is not correct Up is addresing a intelligent student dehadisanhatasya api even though a complex is also endowed with attributes and is exactly the same as the drshyaprapancha avishesham - it is not different from the wall, a desk, a pot. Both are jadam - therfore vijna na yuktam cannot have knowerhood or sentiency. There must be a mysterious or extraenous principle lending sentiency called deva in Kena Up
yadihi dehadi sanghathah rupadyatmakaha san rupadi vijaaneyat bahyapi rupadayaha anyonyam svam svam rupancha vijaniyuhu
Suppose yadihi as pp contends the body dehadisanghatah is sentient by itself, hypothetically, and therefor knows itself as I am body and knows others and there is no Atma. Then - like this body shareeravat with sagunatvam etc - a statue pratima also must be capable of knowing itself svayam prakasha. Suppose this bhautika shareeram knows the other objects around then bahyaha api those external objects rupadayaha like chair etc will also know I am chair svam svam vijanayhu will know i am chair i am table etc. anyonyoncha - wil know each other also.
na chaitad asti tasmad dehadi lakshanams cha rupadin etenaiva rupadin etenaiva dehadi vyatirikte naiva vijnana svabhavenatmanah vijanati lokah yatha yena lokodahati sogniriti tatvat
na cha etad asti - we dont see any material objects being sentient by itself. tasmad therefore your vada cannot be accepted. There must be a nonmaterial entity in the Creation. Scientist are refusing to accept this fundemental principle. They relate consciousness as part property or product of matter. Consciousness is an independent entity. dehadi lakshanams cha rupadin etenaiva vijanati with the help of the conscioiusness principle the bodymind complex becomes an object of knowledge. body/mind never knows itself. Because of this transcendental consciousness dehadivyatiriktena which is different from the body/mind complex which is of the nature of consciousness itself vijnana svabhavena atmana the world is able to objectify the body/mind complex dehadi lakshanancha vijanati and their material properties rupadi. Consciousness principle is experienced by people at all times - you dont need a special state a special avastha a special samadhi to experience the consciousness. Atma anubhava we have always all the time. That ever experienced atma An example is given - imagine a red hot iron ball loha - when you touch the ball it will burn the hand - dahati and we say the iron burnt the hand but with a little of thought we conclude that iron does not have heat of its own. Hence there must be some other principle pervading the iron ball because of which the iron is able to burn other things. That entity which is other than the iron is called agnih fire. In the case of the iron you can see the agni because it is red, but say in the case of hot water that heat principle is invisible. Similarly the body is sentient because of the atma.
atmanovijneyamkim atrasminloke parishishyate na kincit parishishytae sarvameva atmanavijenyam yasyatmano vijneyam na kincit parishishyate sa atma sarvajnaha etadvaitat.
kim atra parishishyate? What remains in the world which is outside the awarenness of the Atma? atra = asmin loke = this vyavaharica prapancha. kim parishishyate? what remains outside the awareness of Atma. No object exists outside awareness. The moment you say something exists outside awareness as even you say it it has fallen within awareness. If it falls outside awareness you cannot talk about its existence and so we can v v boldy say that whatever exists outside awareness is NONexistent. Suppose a person says there are so many objects that I am not aware of - those obects are not falling within the range of the mind and the sense organs - no object can be outside awareness. If there is a dance program in the heavens it is falling within awareness of Indra - everything is within the awareness of someone. What never comes in someones awareness at anytime is nonexistence. na kinchit parishishyati - nothing exists outside of awareness. Awareness and consciousness are used synonmously in Vedanta. sarvam eva tu -Everything in the creation is revealed by Atma. yasya atmanaha avijneyam na kincit parishishyate - nothing remains in the world which is not revealed by Atma. tameva bhantam..... Such an Atma naturally has to be sarvajnaha all revealing or Omniscient. Sarvajnaha will be interpreted in two different ways according to the context - sometimes we say Ishwara is sarvajnaha and sometimes we say nirguna Brahma or Atma is sarvajnaha - they have to be understood in different ways. When we say Ishwara - term Ishwara includes Atma plus Maya - KNower of everything in the creation - and He has a Omniscient Mind which is nothing by Maya. Ishwaras sarvajnatvam is through Maya. In this context we are talkiing about chaitanya Atma - and when we say this chaitanya Atma is sarvajnaha - it means it is the revealer of everything including Maya - how? by itself. Ishwara's sarvajnatvam is savikaram - Brahmans sarvajnatvam is nirvikaram;
yetadvaitat - This is That. Which is what?? From the context we understand this and that.
kim tat yat Nachiketasa prshtam devadhibhiradi vichikitsikitam dharmaadibyonyat Vishnor paramam padam yasmat param nasti tattvaa etat adhigatamityartha
Etad is this consciousness. kim tat - what is meant by tat?It is nothing other than that which Nachiketas asked about yat Nachiketasa prshtam (Katha U 1.1.20) devadi virabi vichikitsitam which Atma is debated by even the Gods- i.e. even the Gods do not know it (Katha U 1.1.21) dharmadibhya anyat (Katha U 1.2.14) which is other than Dharma and Adharma (cause and effect, other than past present and future, Absolute) and Vishnoparamampadam (Katha U 1.3.9) - the Ultimate Goal - absolute nature - nirgunam brahman, and unsurpassable yasmat param nasti (Katha Up 1.3.11) that alone is meant by That tat - adhigatam which has been learnt in this mantra as chaitanyam as the ever exerienced consciousness.
Anvya:
yena etena eva roopam rasam gandham shabdan sparshan maithunancha sarvaha vijanati etad vai tad (bhavati) atra kim parishishyate?