[Advaita-l] [advaitin] 'Prana' as Brahman

[Venkatraghavan S]

Namaste Subbuji,
Resending as the previous message was not delivered due to the size.

An important distinction has to be drawn between the upAsya and the loka to
which the upAsaka goes. Shankaracharya in the kAryAdhikaraNam had said:
तस्मात्कार्यब्रह्मविषया एव गतिश्रुतयः इति सिद्धान्तः

What he is saying is that the loka to which the upAsaka travels is kArya
brahma's loka. However, this is true whether the upAsya devata is kArya
brahma or saguNa brahma (Ishvara). Even if the upAsaka does an upAsana of
Ishvara, he goes to kArya brahma loka only. How can we know this subtle
difference? We go back to the kAryAdhikaraNam only, specifically, to the
last sUtra न च कार्ये प्रतिपत्त्यभिसन्धिः ॥ १४ ॥

This particular adhikaraNa is unique because the siddhAnta sUtra-s are
mentioned first, and then the pUrvapaksha sUtra-s are mentioned - however,
there is no sUtra which refutes the pUrva paksha afterwards. Therefore, the
bhAShyakAra clarifies this to say that the siddhAnta sUtra-s only prevail.
In doing so, the last sUtra 4.3.14 is a pUrva-paksha sUtra, and in
commenting on this sUtra at the very end, Shankaracharya distinguishes
this:

यत्रापि ब्रह्म प्रकृत्य गतिरुच्यते — यथा ‘प्राणो ब्रह्म कं ब्रह्म खं
ब्रह्म’ (छा. उ. ४ । १० । ४) इति ‘अथ यदिदमस्मिन्ब्रह्मपुरे दहरं पुण्डरीकं
वेश्म’ (छा. उ. ८ । १ । १) इति च, तत्रापि वामनीत्वादिभिः सत्यकामादिभिश्च
गुणैः सगुणस्यैव उपास्यत्वात् सम्भवति गतिः । न क्वचित्परब्रह्मविषया गतिः
श्राव्यते ।....तस्मादपरविषया गतिः । तत्र परापरब्रह्मविवेकानवधारणेन
अपरस्मिन्ब्रह्मणि वर्तमाना गतिश्रुतयः परस्मिन्नध्यारोप्यन्ते । किं द्वे
ब्रह्मणी परमपरं चेति ? बाढं द्वे — ‘एतद्वै सत्यकाम परं चापरं च ब्रह्म
यदोंकारः’ (प्र. उ. ५ । २) इत्यादिदर्शनात् ।
*Even where the shruti talks of travel in the context of Brahman - "prANa
is Brahman, bliss is Brahman, space is Brahman", "Now, in this city of
Brahman (the body) there is a small house (दहरं = small, वेश्म = house)
which is the heart (पुण्डरीकं = lotus = heart)", travel is possible because
the object of meditation is saguNa, because he is meditated as being
endowed with qualities such as bestower of auspiciousness (वामनी:), etc and
as one whose desires are ever fulfilled (सत्यकाम:), etc. There is no travel
in the case of the Supreme Brahman (parabrahma here = nirguNa
brahman).....Therefore travel is only when the object of meditation is not
the Supreme Brahman (nirguNa brahman). It is because one fails to
distinguish between Parabrahman and aparabrahman that the shruti-s that
talk of travel in the case of aparabrahman, are superimposed onto the
Parabrahman.  Are there two Brahman-s then - the Superior and the Inferior?
Indeed there are two - "This verily, O Satyakama, the two Brahman-s - the
Superior and the Inferior are verily the OmkAra".*

किं पुनः परं ब्रह्म किमपरमिति, उच्यते — यत्र
अविद्याकृतनामरूपादिविशेषप्रतिषेधात् अस्थूलादिशब्दैर्ब्रह्मोपदिश्यते,
तत्परम् ; तदेव यत्र नामरूपादिविशेषेण केनचिद्विशिष्टम् उपासनायोपदिश्यते —
‘मनोमयः प्राणशरीरो भारूपः’ (छा. उ. ३ । १४ । २) इत्यादिशब्दैः, तदपरम् ।
*What then is param brahma, and what is aparam? It is said - Where Brahman
is taught using words such as "not gross" etc, as a result of the negation
of all manner of specialisation of the nature of names and forms that are
the result of ignorance - that is param. The very same entity when it is
taught for the purpose of meditation as being endowed with certain
qualities such as names and forms - with words such as "(meditate upon
Ishvara as the) mind of all individual minds, having the prANa-s as His
body, is of the nature of consciousness", that is aparam.*

Now, Shankaracharya uses the following terms in this particular section
which we will have to carefully parse through to understand his true intent.
1) kArya brahma
2) saguNa brahma
3) param brahma
4) aparam brahma

kArya brahma - here refers to the Brahman which has kAryopAdhi -
hiraNyagarbha, who has the samaShTi manah as the upAdhi, to whose loka
upAsaka-s travel, and attain krama mukti.

saguNa brahma - here he is actually referring to Ishvara, because elsewhere
in the brahmasUtra he has clarified that the entity that is meditated as
satyakAmAdi guNa vishiShTa, manomayah rUpah etc is Ishvara only, not a
jIva. See the सर्वत्र प्रसिद्धोपदेशात् sUtra in 1.2.1 where Shankaracharya
considers whether it is a jIva as a pUrvapaksha and concludes that it is
Ishvara alone, endowed with attributes such as manomaya rUpam, satyAmAdi
guNa-s etc.

param brahma - in this context, he is referring to nirguNa brahma alone as
param brahma.

aparam brahma - in this context, can refer to either kArya brahma
(hiraNyagarbha) or saguNa brahma (Ishvara). It is easy to understand that
aparam braham can refer to kArya brahma. How can we conclude that aparam
brahma can refer to Ishvara also? In the सर्वत्र प्रसिद्धोपदेशात् (BS
1.2.1) sUtra's bhAShya, Shankaracharya says परमेव ब्रह्मेह
मनोमयत्वादिभिर्धर्मैरुपास्यम्. Here he is saying केनचिद्विशिष्टम्
उपासनायोपदिश्यते — ‘मनोमयः प्राणशरीरो भारूपः’ (छा. उ. ३ । १४ । २)
इत्यादिशब्दैः, तदपरम्. He is calling the same entity as aparam here in BSB
4.3.14, when he had called the entity referred to in the very same viShaya
vAkya as param in BSB 1.2.1 We should be careful and take the contextual
meaning. In BSB 1.2.1, by param brahma he meant Ishvara. Here in BSB
4.3.14, by aparam brahma, he does not mean kArya brahma, he means Ishvara,
i.e. saguNa brahma.

Therefore, we have to draw a distinction here and note that in the
upaniShad-s the upAsana of both hiraNyagarbha and Ishvara is taught. Even
where the upAsya is Ishvara, and the shruti talks of travel, the travel is
to a kArya brahma loka, where the jIva enjoys the benefits of being in
brahmaloka, and is taught brahmavidyA by the lord of brahmaloka (kArya
brahma) and attains krama mukti there. When that loka ends, it is not
Ishvara who gets resolved, but the kArya brahma.

The question then becomes how to resolve the talk of sAyujya with Ishvara
in the jagadvyApArAdhikaraNam (4.4.17 - 22)?
There, in the second sUtra of the adhikaraNa, प्रत्यक्षोपदेशादिति
चेन्नाधिकारिकमण्डलस्थोक्तेः (4.4.18), Shankaracharya makes a statement:

आधिकारिको यः सवितृमण्डलादिषु विशेषायतनेष्ववस्थितः पर ईश्वरः, तदायत्तैव इयं
स्वाराज्यप्राप्तिरुच्यते, यत्कारणम् अनन्तरम् ‘आप्नोति मनसस्पतिम्’ (तै. उ. १
। ६ । २) इत्याह ; यो हि सर्वमनसां पतिः पूर्वसिद्ध ईश्वरः तं
प्राप्नोतीत्येतदुक्तं भवति ;- *the Ishvara, who assigns the duty to the
deity that is resident in the solar orb, etc, the attainment of sovereignty
is said to be dependent on Him, because of which, immediately afterwards,
the shruti says "he attains the lord of the minds" - that pre-existent
Ishvara, who is the lord of all minds, he attains Him - that is being said.*

What this means is that the sAyujya that takes place in places like the
solar orb, or kAryabrahma loka, is not with sUryadevatA or hiraNyagarbha,
but with Ishvara himself who is *also* present there.

This is made even clearer in the ratnaprabhA vyAkhyA:
अधिकारे नियोजयत्यादित्यादीनित्याधिकारिकः, स चासौ मण्डलस्थश्च तस्य
प्राप्यत्वोक्तेरित्यर्थः । मनसस्पतिः सूर्यमण्डलान्तःस्थः परमात्मा
'तत्सवितुर्वरेण्यं भर्गो देवस्य धीमहि । धियो यो नः प्रचोदयात्' इति श्रुतेः
। तथा च यदि पूर्वं निरङ्कुशं स्वाराज्यमुक्तं स्यात्तर्हि ईश्वरस्याग्रे
प्राप्यतां न ब्रूयात् ।
*He assigns tasks to the Sun etc, hence He is called AdhikArika. The phrase
आधिकारिकमण्डलस्थोक्तेः in the Sutra means, because of the statement of
attainment of He who is resident in the world there.* *The lord of the
minds who is resident in the solar arb is the ParamAtma - as known through
the gAyatri mantra. Therefore, if the taittirIya shruti had meant the
attainment of absolute sovereignty (in the statement आप्नोति स्वाराज्यं),
then the attainment of unity with Ishvara later (in the statement आप्नोति
मनसस्पतिं) would not have been said.*

Therefore, the meaning that we attain is as follows:
1) The upAsya is Ishvara only (as known through various mantra-s but
clearly in the bhAShya to सर्वत्र प्रसिद्धोपदेशात्)

2) The travel is to kAryabrahma loka (as known through the bhAShya in the
kAryAdhikaraNam, तस्मात्कार्यब्रह्मविषया एव गतिश्रुतयः इति सिद्धान्तः)

3) The sAyujya is with Ishvara only in kAryabrahma loka, not with
kAryabrahma, through the clarification of the shruti statement आप्नोति
मनसस्पतिम् as elucidated in the bhAShya to 4.4.18 (यो हि सर्वमनसां पतिः
पूर्वसिद्ध ईश्वरः तं प्राप्नोतीत्येतदुक्तं भवति and statements like ये
सगुणब्रह्मोपासनात् सहैव मनसा ईश्वरसायुज्यं व्रजन्ति).

So where does this leave Kailasha and Shiva (or viShNu and Ishvara)? We
have to draw a corollary based on the above conclusions and the tatkratu
nyAya (the upAsaka attains the object of his meditation).

So, to explain: The travel of the upAsaka is to Kailasha, which is
kAryabrahma loka. The sAyujya there is with the the object of his upAsana,
Paramashiva (tatkratu nyAya). There is no requirement that the sAyujya is
only with kArya brahma, it can be sAyujya with Ishvara also. Therefore, the
sAyujya for the one who worships Parameshvara as Shiva, is with Ishvara in
the form of Lord Shiva - not a sAyujya with a jIva, as in the case of the
hiraNyagarbha upAsaka.

However, as the upAsaka has not attained jnAna, Ishvara as Shiva will
Himself teach the upAsaka brahmavidyA in kailAsha and the upAsaka attains
videhakaivalya at the end of the kalpa. The laya that happens at the end of
the kalpa is only to the loka,  not of the Lord himself, for he is nitya
siddha Ishvara. However, in the case of hiraNyagarbha, the laya is of the
kArya upAdhi of hiraNyagarbha - however as hiraNyagarbha is a jIvanmukta
already, that dissolution of the kArya upAdhi is akin to Him attaining
videhakaivalya.

Kind regards,
Venkatraghavan