Aum

MOkshasaadhanam (Means of Liberation) – 14

by Krishna Sastri

Westerners of the biblical religions, of Judaism, Chiristianity and Islam, consider that a soul, a term closest to what we call jeeva , is a created entity at the mercy of God or devil, unlike the eternal transmigrating entity we call ‘ jeeva ’. The concept of non-difference between Paramaathma and jeevaathma is anathema to them. From this flows their lack of concept such as ‘ avidya ’ and so they do not have an equal word for ‘ avidya ’ in English or any of their languages. The word ‘ignorance’ that they use is for not knowing an object. There is no such thing as not knowing oneself in their concept! If at all, they would again use the word ‘ignorance’ to indicate it putting the self (which is the subject) also as an object! We, who have had so much influence of the alien religions, from the times of Christian colonialism and the earlier Muslim domination, should keep this distinction between ‘ avidya ’ and ignorance all the time in our mind in order to clearly understand Vedanta .

We are now taking up the topic of ‘ adhyaarOpam ’ or superimposition.

Sishya to the Guru: I am eternal, true, but as transmigrating jeeva I do experience the sense of agency and its results ( karthruthva bhOkthruthva lakshaNam ). This is evident from my sense perceptions etc. I seek the Supreme Self for salvation. That Supreme Self cannot therefore be my inner most Self. Avidya consists of the superimposition of the qualities of one thing on another such as a well known silver on a well known mother of pearl (as in mistaking the mother of pearl for silver) or a well known human being on a well known post (as in mistaking a post for a man). The non-self cannot therefore be superimposed on the Self, for it is not known. Similarly the Self cannot be superimposed on the non-Self for the very same reason.

Guru: It is not true. There are exceptions.

Sishya: How so? Can you give me an example?

Guru: You are contending that (a) the superimposition can take place only between two known entities ; and you hold (b) the Self to be an unknown entity. But you do say (a) “I am dark” or (b) I am bald or (c) I am a man. In these instances you are superimposing the features of a known entity viz. the body on the Self which you contend as the unknown entity merely held by you as an object of “I” consciousness.

Sishya: In that case I should say that the superimposition has taken place between two well known objects such as between the well known body and the well known Self being the object of “I” consciousness. There is therefore no exception here.

Guru: Your argument appears to be correct but not really. For these two entities such as the body (which is an object) and the Self (which is NOT an object) are not both objective knowledge such as you can say: “This is the body” and “This is the Self”. That is, while the body can be pointed to objectively, the Self cannot be pointed out. It is for this reason that people are deluded about the nature of the Self and the non-Self.

(contd.)