30. Avyakta

Adhyaya 1 PAda 4 - AdhikaraNa 1

The Word "Avyakta" in KaTha UpaniShad 1.3.11 Refers to the Subtle Body and Not to PradhAna


Introduction by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa

Invocation


tamaH sa~Nkhya-ghanodIrNa-
vidIrNaM yasya go-gaNaiH
taM samvid-bhUShaNaM kR^iShNa-
pUShaNaM samupAsmahe

Let us offer our respectful obeisances to the KR^iShNa-sun, which is decorated with transcendental knowledge, and which with its effulgence dispels the deep darkness of Sa~Nkhya.

(ViShaya): Previously the sUtras affirmed that the Supreme Brahman is He the knowledge of whom brings liberation, He who is the seed of the birth, maintenance, and destruction of the material universes, who is different from both the jIvas and dead matter, who possesses innumerable inconceivable potencies, who is all-knowing, who possesses all auspicious qualities, who is free from all inauspiciousness, who possesses unlimited opulences, and who is supremely pure.

Now we will consider the theory that the pradhAna (primordial material nature) and the pum (individual living entities) together comprise all that exists (and there is no God separate from them), which is propounded in the Kapila-tantra and perhaps also seen in some branches of the Vedas. They quote the following passage from KaTha UpaniShad:

indriyebhyaH parA hy arthA
arthebhyash ca paraM manaH
manasas tu parA buddhir
buddher AtmA mahAn paraH

mahataH param avyaktam
avyaktAt puruShaH paraH
puruShAn na paraM ki~ncit
sA kAShThA sA parA gatiH


"The sense-objects are higher than the senses. The mind is higher than the sense-objects. Intelligence is higher than the mind. The mahat is higher than the intelligence. The avyakta (the unmanifested) is higher than the mahat. The puruSha (the person) is higher than the unmanifested. Nothing is higher than the person. The person is the highest."

SaMshaya: The doubt here is whether the word avyakta (the unmanifested) refers to the pradhAna (the primordial stage of material nature) or the sharIra (the body).

PUrvapakSha: The opponent may answer this doubt by saying that because both shruti and smR^iti give the sequence as first mahat, then avyakta, and then puruSha, therefore the word avyakta here must refer to the pradhAna.

SiddhAnta: Whether the word avyakta refers to pradhAna or sharIra is explained in the following sUtra


SUtra 1


anumAnikam apy ekeShAm iti cen na sharIra-rUpaka-vinyasta-gR^ihItair
darshayati ca.

anumAnikam - the inference; apy - even; ekeShAm - of some; iti - thus; cen - if; na - not; sharIra - the body; rUpaka - the metaphor; vinyasta - placed; gR^ihItair - because of being accepted; darshayati - reveals; ca - and.


If some assume (that the word "avyakta" in this passage of the KaTha UpaniShad refers to the pradhAna), then I say "No." The fact that this passage is part of a metaphor referring to the body clearly shows (that the word avyakta" here means sharIra).

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


The KaThakas (ekeShAm) consider (anumAnikam) that the word avyakta here refers to the pradhAna. The opponent may object: The etymology of the word avyakta is "That which is not (a) manifested" ( vyakta). If this is so, then the word avyakta cannot mean anything except the pradhAna (unmanifested material nature).

What is the answer to this objection? The answer is given in this sUtra in the phrase beginning with the word sharIra. Because it is employed in a passage where the body is compared to a chariot, the word avyakta here refers to the sharIra (body). The passage preceding this mention of avyakta, which is a metaphor where the material body is considered to be a chariot, clearly shows this. The preceding passage is given here.


AtmAnaM rathinaM viddhi
sharIraM ratham eva ca
buddhiM tu sArathiM viddhi
manaH pragraham eva ca

indriyANi hayAn Ahur
viShayAMs teShu gocarAn
Atmendriya-mano-yuktaM
bhoktety Ahur manIShiNaH

yas tv avijNAnavAn bhavaty
ayuktena manasA sadA
tasyendriyAny avashyAni
duShTAshvA iv sAratheH

yas tu vij~nAnavAn bhavati
yuktena manasA sadA
tasyendriyAni vashyAni
sad-ashvA iva sAratheH

yas tu vij~nAnavAn bhavaty
amanaskaH sadA-shuciH
na sa tat-padam Apnoti
saMsAraM cAdhigacchati

yas tu vij~nAnavAn bhavati
sa-manaskaH sadA shuciH
sa tu tat-padam Apnoti
yasmAd bhUyo na jAyate

vij~nAna-sArathir yas tu
manaH pragrahavAn naraH
so .adhvanaH pAram Apnoti
tad viShNoH paramaM padam

indriyebhyaH parA hy arthA
arthebhyash ca paraM manaH
manasas tu parA buddhir
buddher AtmA mahAn paraH

mahataH param avyaktam
avyaktAt puruShaH paraH
puruShAn na paraM ki~ncit
sA kAShThA sA parA gatiH


"The individual is the passenger in the car of the material body, and the intelligence is the driver. Mind is the driving instrument, and the senses are the horses. The self is thus the enjoyer or sufferer in the association of the mind and senses. So it is understood by great thinkers.

"For a fool who does not control his mind, the senses are wild horses drawing the charioteer. For the wise man who controls his mind the senses are good horses obedient to the charioteer.

"An impious fool who does not control his mind does not attain the spiritual world. He attains the world of repeated birth and death. A pious wise man who controls his mind attains the spiritual world. He never again takes birth.

"A person who has transcendental knowledge as a charioteer, and who tightly holds the reins of the mind, attains the path.as final destination: the supreme abode of Lord ViShNu.

"The sense-objects are higher than the senses. The mind is higher than the sense-objects. Intelligence is higher than the mind. The mahat (material nature) is higher than the intelligence. The avyakta (the unmanifested) is higher than the mahat. The puruSha (person) is higher than the unmanifested. Nothing is higher than the person. The person is the highest."

Here the devotee who desires to attain the abode of Lord ViShNu is described as the passenger in a chariot. His body and other possessions are described as a chariot with its various parts. The traveller who keeps the chariot and its parts under control attains the supreme abode of Lord ViShNu. After this is explained, the verses beginning indriyebhyaH parA hy arthAH explain how in the control of the body and its various adjuncts, which are metaphorically considered a chariot and its adjuncts, the various members is more or less difficult to control. In this metaphor of the chariot the senses and other adjuncts of the body are described as horses or other adjuncts of the chariot. The indriyebhyaH verses continue this discussion. Of the things mentioned in the previous verses only the body itself is not listed in the indriyebhyaH verses, and therefore the single ambiguous item ( avyakta) must refer to the sharIra (body) by default. The pradhAna interpretation of this word is also disproved because the content of the indriyebhyaH verses disagrees with the tenants of sa~Nkhya philosophy.


Now the following objection may be raised. The body is clearly manifest. How is it that it is here described as unmanifest? To answer this doubt the author says:


SUtra 2


sUkShmaM tu tad-arhatvAt

sUkShmaM - subtle; tu - certainly; tad-arhatvAt - because of appropriateness.


The word "sharIra" (body) here certainly means the sutble body (sUkShma-sharIra) because that is appropriate in this context.

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


The word tu (certainly) is used here to dispel doubt. The word sharIra here means sUkShma-sharIra (the subtle body). Why? Because that meaning is appropriate. Because it is appropriate to describe the sUkShma-sharIra as avyakta (unmanifest). The quote from BR^ihad-AraNyaka UpaniShad (1.4.7) "tad dhedaM tarhy avyAkR^itam AsIt (Then there was the unmanifested)" shows that before the gross material universe was manifested the living force was present. This shows that the word "unmanifested" is appropriate to describe the subtle body.


The objection may be raised: If the original cause is subtle, then why should that subtle cause not be described as the pradhAna (unmanifested material nature) of the sa~Nkhya theory.

To answer this doubt he says:


SUtra 3


tad-adhInatvAd arthavat

tad - on Him; adhInatvAd - because of
dependence; arthavat - possessing the meaning.


This meaning should be accepted because the pradhAna (unmanifested material nature) is ultimately dependent on Him (the Supreme Brahman).

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


The meaning here is that because pradhAna is ultimately dependent on the Supreme Brahman, which is the original cause of all causes, the creative actions of pradhAna are not the original cause, but are themselves caused by the Supreme Brahman. Because pradhAna is naturally inactive, it only acts when inspired by the glance of Brahman. This is described in the following statements of Vedic literature.


mAyAM tu prakR^itiM vidyAn mAyinaM tu maheshvaram


"The Supreme Personality of Godhead is a magician, and the material world is His magical show."

- shvetAshvatara UpaniShad (4.10)


asmAn mAyI sR^ijate vishvam etat


"The master of MAyA creates this world."

- shvetAshvatara UpaniShad (4.9).


ya eka varNo bahudhA shakti-yogAd
varNAn anekAn nihitArtho dadhAti


"He who has no rival creates the varieties of this world, using His own potencies according to His own wish."

- shvetAshvatara UpaniShad (4.1).


sa eva bhUyo nija-vIrya-coditM_
sva-jIva-mAyAM prakR^itiM sisR^ikShatIm
anAma-rUpAtmani rUpa-nAmanI
vidhitsamAno .anusasAra shAstra-kR^it


"The Personality of Godhead, again desiring to give names and forms to His parts and parcels, the living entities, placed them under the guidance of material nature. By His own potency, material nature is empowered to re-create."

- shrImad-BhAgavatam 1.10.22


pradhAnaM puruShaM cApi
pravishyAtmecchayA hariH
kShobhayAm Asa samprApte
sarga-kAle vyayAvyayau


"At the time of creation Lord Hari enters the changing pradhAna and the unchanging living souls, and agitates them according to His wish."

- ViShNu PurANa


mayAdhyAkSheNa prakR^itiH
sUyate sa-carAcaram
hetunAnena kaunteya
jagad viparivartate


"The material nature, which is one of my energies, is working under my direction, O son of KuntI, producing all moving and non-moving beings. Under its rule this manifestation is created and annihilated again and again."
- Bhagavad-gItA 9.10

We do not accept the sa~Nkhya theory because it considers pradhAna the original, independent cause of all causes.


SUtra 4


j~neyatvAvacanatvAc ca

j~neyatva - the state of being the object of knowledge; avacanatvAt - because of non-description; ca - and.


The "avyakta" of this passage is not described as the object of knowledge. This another reason for not interpreting this "avyakta" to be pradhAna.

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


Claiming that liberation is obtained by understanding the difference between the the spiritual living entity, or soul and the modes of material nature, the sa~Nkhya theorists affirm that one should know the real nature of pradhAna in order to obtain certain powers. Because this passage from the KaTha UpaniShad in no way describes any of this, the word avyakta here cannot refer to the pradhAna of the Sa~Nkhyites.


SUtra 5


vadatIti cen na prAj~no hi prakaraNAt

vadati - says; iti - thus; cet - if; na - no; prAj~no - the omniscient ParamAtmA; hi - indeed; prakaraNAt - because of reference.


If someone says "This passage does describe pradhAna in this way" then I say "No. That statement refers to the omniscient Personality of Godhead."

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


Someone may object: "Your contention that the word avyakta in this passage of KaTha UpaniShad cannot refer to pradhAna because the avyakta here is not described as the object of knowledge has in no way been proved. PradhAna is described in this way in the very next verse (KaTha UpaniShad 1.3.15):


ashabdam asparsham arUpam avyayaM
tathA-rasaM nityam agandhavac ca yat
anAdy anantaM mahataH paraM dhruvaM
nicAyya taM mR^ityu-mukhAt pramucyate


"By meditating on the soundless, touchless, formless, unchanging, tasteless, eternal, fragranceless, beginningless, endless, Supreme Great, one becomes free from the mouth of death."


Someone may object: If these words do not describe pradhAna as the ultimate object of knowledge, then what do they describe?

To this objection I reply: These words describe the omniscient Personality of Godhead. These words are an appropriate description of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, about whom the following words are said:


puruShAn na paraM ki~ncit
sA kAShThA sA parA gatiH


"Nothing is higher than the Supreme Person. The Supreme Person is the highest."
- KaTha UpaniShad 1.3.11


eSha sarveShu bhUteShu
gUDhAtmA na prakAshate


"Hiding in the hearts of all beings, the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not openly manifest."
KaTha UpaniShad 1.3.12

To further explain that the word in question does not refer to pradhAna he says:


SUtra 6


trayANAm eva caivam upanyAsah prashnash ca

trayANAm - of the three;eva - indeed; ca - certainly; evam - in this way; upanyAsah - mention; prashnash - question; ca - and.


In this context three questions certainly are mentioned.

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


The word ca (certainly) here is meant to remove doubt. In this passage of KaTha UpaniShad only three questions are asked. They are: 1. Naciketa.as request that his father be kind to him, 2. his request for celestial fire, and 3. his desire to know the true nature of the self. Nothing else is asked. There is no mention of pradhAna
.


SUtra 7


mahadvac ca

mahat - the mahat; vat - like; ca - also.
This usage is like the usage of the word "mahat".

Purport by shrIla Baladeva VidyAbhUShaNa


Because the word mahAn in the phrase buddher AtmA mahAn paraH (The Great Self is higher than the intelligence.) is never taken to mean the mahat-tattva (material nature) of the sa~Nkhya theory, in the same way the avyakta (unmanifested) mentioned here to be higher than this mahat should not be taken to mean the pradhAna of sa~Nkhya.