Today, Swami Kaivalyanandaji continued with the commentary of the 13th chapter, 3rd verse. ‘Kshetrajnam api mam vidhi, sarvakshetresu bharata’ – ‘Know Me to be the Knower in all fields, Arjuna!’

Here, there is another interesting discussion between Shankara’s ‘Siddhanti’ and the opposing ‘Purva Paksha.’ Previously, we mentioned that Shankara compared the ignorance of the jiva to confusing a pillar for a man. This is similar to confusing the Atman for the body, mind, and senses.

Here, the ‘purva paksha’ says; ‘yes, I agree that one can confuse a pillar for a man, because both of these objects are separate from the knower. But this isn’t a proper example for the Atman, because the Atman is not a separate object; it is the knower itself! So how can the Atman be confused for something else, when it is not an object of knowledge?’ This is the doubt that is raised. As I said before, these doubts are shown to make our minds have more decisiveness in the truth. To this, Shankara says again that the qualities attributed to the Self like happiness and suffering, etc., are all due to the super-imposition caused by ignorance.

For example, foolish people look at the sky and say that it is a place, or that it is blue, etc. Actually, the sky has none of these qualities. Space has no attributes, and is undefinable. Thus, the space is not affected by any of these imagined qualities. Therefore, even though it is God, the Paramatma, in all the bodies of all living beings, God doesn’t ever become a part of samsara, the worldly bondage. Then as to the example being unsuitable, Shankara says that the purpose of the example was only to show that confusion of two things can exist, not to show that confusion can only happen to two things that are known.

Swami said that the purva pakshas here can be compared to some disciples. Before the Guru even finishes explaining, the disciple is already thinking of doubts in the mind. Such a disciple can never grasp the truth, even if he listens to the Guru for decades. There is the story of Kumarilabhatta. He was a great scholar in the tradition of Purva Mimamsa, which gives importance to the Karma Kanda of the Vedas. His whole life was to prove the highest authority of the Vedas as the truth. His main opponents were the later followers of Buddha, who refuted the Vedas as an authority, or ‘pramana.’

Therefore, Kumarilabhatta shaved his head, donned the clothes of a ‘bhikshu,’ and studied directly from the Buddhist teachers. He asked them many questions, to find where he could defeat them. After studying like this, he wrote many well-known works, which refuted the Buddhists and proved the authority of the Vedas.

Similarly, many disciples have the same attitude, Swami said. Instead of grasping what is being said, their minds are busy thinking of doubts and any shortcomings in the subject. Whenever they get the opportunity, they are ready to give advice to the Guru. At the same time, they say they are great ‘disciples.’

Piyush,
July 18, 2007