Well we are reading the Māṇdukya Upaniṣad.
This is our online class no. 11
on Chapter No.1, first chapter of the Māṇdukya
Upaniṣad.
In our last meeting on 16 Aug., we discussed
three theories about whether the Universe
existed in the cause or God before creation.
And then we were answering two questions.
How is the Universe created and what is the
nature of or material for the creation?
Thereafter, we were discussing various views.
We came to the seventh view or seventh point
of view and that is like this.
That is almost the last group.
I just call it the last group, because the
revered Gaudapāda considers this group as
the last.
At the end he considers this group.
Then he proceeds further.
The adherents of this group say that it is
the nature (swabhāvoyam) of God.
It has become or it is the very nature of
God.
The non-dual Vedānta or advaita Vedānta,
agrees with this opinion.
This is called Swabhāva.
Swabhāva means nature.
Swabhāva means what can never be separated from the Swabhāvi or the person whose nature it is.
If we ask: why is this creation?
The answer is: It is the very nature of the
creator, Swabhāva.
If you ask: Why is the sun hot?
The answer is: because it is the sun.
It is sun’s very nature.
Why is the ice cold?
Because it is its very nature.
Creation is an inseparable part of God.
If he is God, then he is the creator.
God and God’s power of creation cannot be
separated, that’s what Sri Rāmakrishna says.
That is why he is the creator because he has
the power of creation.
That is his Swabhāva.
Then the sage Gaudapada refutes all other
opinions by one sentence.
In Sanskrit it is a wonderful sentence, “Aptakāmasya
kā spriha” – what desire or will can
be there for God who is ever fulfilled.
Therefore, the idea and process of creation
is a regular thing.
No why-question is logical.
It is not God’s play.
It is not for God’s enjoyment.
It is not his will, etc. so many points we
have already discussed.
But it is an inseparable aspect of God.
It is of the nature of a dream or a relative
existence called Måya.
The topic of Creation, Sṛśti, is concluded
here.
Gaudapåda will give big elaboration of this
concept in the third chapter of this Upaniṣad.
So we will not go much deeper into this now.
In the commentary verses, those which are
called Kārikās, No. 6 to 9, Gaudapāda explains
the 6th mantra.
Iśwara is the source or cause of this creation
(jagat Karanam, yonih).
The word is “yoniḥ”.
Yoniḥ means creation
Incidentally, he dwelt on the idea of the
creation coming out of its own cause.
The word “own” is special here.
The creation coming is out of its own cause.
It is like, the mango tree coming out of its
“own” cause, the mango seed, not from
the apple seed.
This is called satkāryavada, i.e. the world
was already existent in its cause and that
is called as the Iśwara or God.
That means, as we have already said, in creation
a brand new effect or thing is not produced,
only the unmanifest cause has been manifested.
Creation means a transition from the unmanifest
to the manifest.
Dissolution is just the opposite: the manifested
effect goes back to the unmanifest form.
Thereafter, Gaudapāda has said that the creation
is a “relative” creation.
It is not ultimately real.
The nature of the creation is unreal means
relatively real.
At the same time, it is settled that we cannot
ask about the purpose of the creation.
Others may try to find a purpose.
But Vedānta says that we cannot question
the purpose behind
the creation.
It is the very nature of Iśwara or God, the
creator.
Human qualities are inseparable part of humans.
It is exactly like that.
It moves between manifested and unmanifested
forms, that happens naturally.
So we cannot ask any question.
If there is a beginning, then you could have
asked a question.
This idea is supportive of a multi-verse theory;
many universes existing at the same time.
There would be no time when the creation would
not be there, that is the idea here.
There could be many universes at the same
time, and that is what is called creation.
The Hindu thought says that by one glance
of the Śakti, the female creative power of
Iśwara, millions of Universes roll forth.
So that is the multiverse theory which many
of the scientist these days are promoting
these ideas.
This position gives rise to a question which
needs to be answered.
The question is: if the creation is an integral
part of God, then we have to accept that,
the duality of, God and Universe, will be
a permanent Truth.
There will be infinite God and there will
be infinite Universe.
Then you accept duality, in contradiction
to your own position of one Infinite Reality.
You create two infinities.
That is illogical.
Ans is: Thank you for your question.
That is what they say.
That would be the position, if we accept the
creation to be “real and permanently there”,
then there is no doubt that there will be
an acceptance of permanent duality.
Then there will be the awful possibility of
accepting many Infinities.
But we are actually talking about a temporary
and therefore a relative or an unreal creation
(swapna Māyā prapancha).
This unreal creation cannot cause duality
even if it is always there in God.
The same idea of unreality continues in all
the three states of the creation – in creation,
preservation, and dissolution – Sristi,
sthiti, laya.
Let us analyse the point based on which Gaudapāda
accepted that last opinion that it is the
nature of the God.
From that standpoint, we have learnt that
creation is the nature or swabhāva of Iśwara.
This Swabhāva or nature is called Māyā.
Māyā is the nature of God.
Now we have to clarify one very important
point here.
There are two words in Sanskrit which seem
to be synonymous from their literal meaning
– Swabhāva and Swarupa.
Swabhāva means the nature, and Swarupa means
the real nature.
What is the difference?
Māyā is the swabhāva of God, whereas existence-knowledge
and bliss, satyam-jñānam-anantam, are the
swarupam of Iśwara.
There is a “real” difference here.
Swarupam or the real nature of God is satyam
or real or truth, whereas the swabhāva or
Māyā of God is the opposite of satyam, which
is Mithya or unreal.
Similarly, the the real nature of God is jñānam
or knowledge, whereas Māyā is Ajñānam
or ignorance; etc.
If Māyā is the real nature of God, Swarupam,
then Brahman will be asat, or non-existent
or relative.
What is the meaning of the Swabhāva?
If someone suppose tells lies for a reason,
and you have detected it for the first time,
then you feel sad.
If the same person lies even if there is no
reason, and also he does it again and again,
then you call him a liar.
Or going a little further, you may call him
a pathological liar.
So lying is his Swabhāva.
That is his habit.
Similarly, deception, anger, etc can be our
Swabhāva, our habit.
But our swarupa is that we are human beings.
We are not lies, we are not anger, we are
not deception.
We are human beings.
A liar can be free from the habit of lying.
A habit can be removed.
Therefore, we understand that lying is Swabhāva
in the form of habit.
It is the habit of God to create.
But the swarupa or real nature of the Iśwara
is existence-knowledge and bliss, which are
permanent.
You cannot remove that from Iśwara.
We can remove the habit of lying or anything
but we cannot remove or we cannot deny that
we are human beings.
If that is denied then we are not human beings.
Then who will tell lies.
So existence, knowledge and bliss, that is
the permanent nature of God and that cannot
be removed.
So this much about that opinion of Swabhāva
or standpoint.
Now we will go to the Upaniśad mantra number
7.
This is the most poetic of all the mantras.
This is a wonderful mantra.
I
will read in Sanskrit first.
nāntaḥprajñaṃ na bahiṣprajñaṃ nobhayataḥ
prajñaṃ na prajñānaghanaṃ na prajñaṃ
nāprajñam.
adṛṣṭam avyavahāryam agrāhyam alakṣaṇam
acintyam avyapadeśyam ekātmapratyayasāraṃ.
prapañcopaśamaṃ śāntaṃ śivam advaitaṃ
caturthaṃ manyante samādhī ātmā samādhī
vijñeyaḥ.
Running translation will be like this:
They consider the Fourth, caturtham, that
is the meaning.
Fourth is the meaning of the word caturtham.
They consider the Fourth and this fourth will
be referred to as Turiyam later on.
So they consider the Fourth to be that which
is not conscious of the internal world, nor
conscious of the external world, nor conscious
of both the worlds, nor a mass of consciousness,
nor conscious, nor unconscious; which is unseen,
beyond empirical dealings, beyond the grasp
of the organs of action, un-inferable, unthinkable,
indescribable; whose valid proof consists
in the single belief in the Self: in which
all phenomena cease; and which is unchanging,
auspicious, and non-dual.
That is the Self, and That is to be known.
That is to be known.
That is to be meditated upon?
No!
Known.
That is to be worked with?
No!
That is to be known.
In the previous mantras, 3 to 6, the first
three pādas or indicators of the Ātman were
revealed.
The third mantra spoke about the first pādah
or indicator, the fourth mantra spoke about
the second pādah or indicator, and the 5
and 6 about the third indicator, Tritiya pādah.
I am using the word indicator for the translation
of the Sanskrit word Pādah, because it seems
to be the most appropriate word.
We have seen that the consciousness associated
with the waking state is known as Viśwa-Virāt;
as the individual it is called Viśwa, and
as the aggregate it is called Virāt.
Similarly in the dream state the individual
is called Taijasah, and the aggregate is called
the Hiraṇyagarbhaḥ.
We have studied these things already.
I am just recapitulating to connect them to
our present discussion.
And in the deep sleep state it is known as
Prājñah, and aggregate is known as Iśwarah.
But as we have already said and seen, Gaudapāda
connects both these aggregate and individual
as one.
So in the waking state this waking world is
called Viśwa, like that it will go.
Now in this mantra the fourth pāda, chaturtha
pāda of the Ātman is to be revealed.
This is the task before us.
Because the first mantra of the Upaniśad
promised that it will reveal the four pādas
of Ātman.
In the fist mantra it is said soyam Ātma
chatuśpāt.
That Ātman is having four indicators or four
aspects.
Now we are going to look into the fourth.
Once again, let us remember that the word
Pādaḥ can be translated as: quarter, four
quarters then it makes a whole or aspect,
four aspects.
It is waking state, dream state or deep sleep
state or four features or four indicators.
In this mantra it is called the fourth.
Only word fourth not fourth indicator, nothing
Fourth has different synonyms in Sanskrit.
Fourth means chaturtham.
This word has got different synonyms, chaturtham
is chaturiyam or turiyam.
All mean the same.
The fourth.
There is no mystic significance of the word
Turiyam.
Please remember this.
Many people who like Māṇdukya Upaniṣad
they are mystified to talk about this word
Turiyam as if it is mystical.
No!
Vedānta is very down to the Earth and very
practical.
To indicate a fourth person suppose, you may
use these expressions in Sanskrit: chatiriyah
purushah means fourth person, turiyah purushah,
the fourth person.
There is nothing mystical about it.
So fourth means fourth, Turiyam.
Turiyam means fourth.
What is this chaturtha pādah?
Now what I will do in today’s class, is:
I will try to give almost half of the introduction
to this Mantra number 7.
To introduce this mantra we need a really
really big introduction because it is sucha
wonderful mantra.
So I will try to give almost the half of the
introduction.
The mantra is so precious.
It is difficult to be revealed by explanations.
The first three pādas, we have experienced.
The first pāda: You as waker, the Viśwa,
have been experienced by you.
You know what you are, when you are in waking
state.
In that pāda, the consciousness was turned
outward.
You experience the world outside you, including
you.
The second pāda, the dream state, has been
experienced by you as taijasah.
You got different names.
Instead of dreamer you are the taijasa
There the consciousness is turned inward.
You have a dream inside.
The third pāda or the sleep state or the
deep sleep state, has the individual as Prājñah
in it.
This is also well known.
We know we have slept well.
They are well known, they are all well known
because we experience them daily without exception.
This is our experience.
We are sometimes in the waking state, sometimes
in the dreams state, we are sometimes in the
deep sleep state.
Who can deny that?
Nobody can!
Everybody has to accept it.
Therefore, really speaking, Viśwa, Taijasa
or Prājña, are not at all new things, that
is being revealed by the scripture.
The scripture does not have to reveal it.
I know it!
From my own experience I know it.
It is only talking about what is already known
by every one of us.
The scripture has given them these names,
which we did not know, that’s all.
Now we have learnt the names.
The waker is called Viśwa.
When scriptures talk about things which are
already known, then it is called a sentence
repeating the known thing.
In Sanskrit it is called anuvada vākyam.
Means a theoretical expression, a wordy expression
after the experience has happened, anu, or
a sentence which is already experienced or
known.
That is how it is.
In such a sentence we do not learn anything
new.
Did we learn anything new?
Our experiences can be spoken by sentences,
which do not reveal anything new, but will
repeat the experience in words.
Since a thing can be or is, known by all,
that thing can be known by empirical data.
(An anuvada vakyam.
Pramanantrara gamya vishayakam vakyam).
The data, the proof that you get, you collect
those data from the empirical world because
it is only the empirical data that are available
to all.
Which data is available to all?
Transcendental?
No!
Empirical data, worldly data available to
all.
The empirical experiences are available for
scrutiny by empirical data.
This we have to understand.
Now we will learn a rule before we take up
our study further.
The rule is that the Upaniśad is going to
reveal a science.
This science is data-based.
It is not saying something which does not
have any proof, any evidence.
Like for example, Sanskrit grammar.
Sanskrit language is based on the Sanskrit-data
or Sanskrit rules that are used by Sanskrit
Grammar, and those data are used by Sanskrit
Grammar to validate a Sanskrit sentence or
its meaning.
Like any other language.
You do not bring data from the Chemistry lab
to validate or invalidate Sanskrit language
grammar.
Clear?
Suppose, you are doing research to find out
whether there is water in the moon.
You bring data, or samples from the moon.
And some scientists study those moon-data
and announce their conclusion saying that
“there is no Mars”!
How ridiculous would be the announcement?
You have collected data from the moon.
Your announcement should be on or about the
moon only.
It becomes laughable if you use moon-data
to deny the existence of Mars.
Correct?
Similarly, when you are studying the Upaniśads
to find out what Truth they reveal, you cannot
bring data from Chemistry lab, or even from
the Bible, or any other book for that matter.
Or you cannot bring data from any empirical
sources.
Empirical data is valid for everybody’s
knowledge.
The Upaniśad is revealing something which
is not everybody’s knowledge.
The Upaniśad is revealing a transcendental
Truth with the help of transcendental data.
This is a path of knowledge.
The Triputi or the three participants in this
path are: the knower called the Pramāta,
then the the thing to be known, or Prameyah,
and the means by which Pramāta or the subject
interacts with the object is called knowledge.
And that is called Pramānam, testimony, reasoning.
We are going to know that we are Ātman.
How will we know it?
We are going to know that we are Ātman, we
are not the body, we are not the mind, we
are not the world.
We will use the means or Pramanam or means,
the proof, called Vedānta or the Upaniśads,
to know it.
In this quest, the data that we get in the
Upaniśads are the only valid data.
No other data can be acceptable, can be used.
No other data.
Clear?
Now we are studying something which is, not
evident to us.
It is not evident.
The Upaniśad is going to reveal it therefore
through pramāṇam or reasoning, based on
the data that are available in the Upaniśads
or Vedānta.
Hence, in course of my discussion, I will
always remind you saying the “Upaniśad
does not say so” or “Vedānta does say
so”!
Then you have to understand that since Vedānta
or the Upaniśads do not say so, therefore,
and therefore, it is not a valid proof or
it is unacceptable.
If they say so, then only it is acceptable.
We have to remember this.
No question or doubt can be accepted, that
are generated in your mind from your knowledge
from the chemistry lab.
We won’t accept that data.
Because those are empirical data, they are
known to all.
We don’t need your data!
Because your knowledge about other things
are not something new; not something that
you do not know.
Therefore we won’t accept it.
Clear?
Please remember this before I or we proceed
further in studying this science, the data-based
science.
When the Upaniśad reveals something that
you do not know, then the sentences it uses
are called testimony, evidence, or Pramāṇam.
Suppose the Chandogya Upaniśad says: tat
tvam asi, you are that Brahman, the Substratum.
Tat : that, tvam : you, asi : are.
You are that!
This is not a known fact to you, even you
do not know this.
So this is not a known fact to all.
So this is an undeniable, unquestionable evidence
because the Upaniṣad says so.
What did I say?
When I say the “Upaniṣad says so”, it
is an undeniable, unquestionable evidence.
You cannot deny it.
Suppose Mr. John suffered from a very stressful
and catastrophic misfortune.
But you see that he remained unaffected by
such a fate.
That is something very remarkable, amazing.
You become curious and ask him, “How do
you maintain your mental balance in such catastrophic
situation?”
From your empirical knowledge you know that
after a furious hurricane a small wooden house
remained intact.
You have seen it.
Then you have learnt that, that house had
a central pillar which was strong.
Now will you expect that John will say that
I have used that same pillar to face my misfortune?
Same wooden or steel pillar.
No.
Rather, when John says that he practises meditation
and therefore he knows how to keep the mind
steady in spite of our stressful challenges,
then what do you do?
You accept it as a testimony or proof for
his calmness, for his fortitude.
It is an unquestionable proof.
And it is not known to all and you have to
accept it.
Such sentences are called a pramana vakyam,
or a sentence that cannot be verified by any
other data, than the data that are available
in the Upaniśads.
It is like saying: the correctness of Sanskrit
sentences cannot be verified by any other
proof than by Sanskrit grammar.
You have to use Sanskrit grammar.
Is it clear?
Mantra number 3 reveals the first pādah of
Ātman and that first pāda is called Viśwa.
It is in the waking state.
When the consciousness is turned outward,
as it were, we experience this world as waking
state.
What is this name Viśwa?
Now let me tell you that, you, my dear listener,
you have this new name Viśwa.
We don’t need to see who you are.
What your age is, etc.
You are called Viśwa.
Right?
Please remember it.
It is a Sanskrit name for you.
Please remember that when you are listening
to this Māṇdukya Upaniśad class, your
Sanskrit name is Viśwa.
For this short time at least, please forget
your Passport name.
You are Viśwa.
If you are not dreaming while listening to
this class, then you are Viśwa, you are in
the waking state.
If you are not in deep sleep, sound sleep
now, I hope you are not, then you are Viśwa.
You may be a man; you may be a woman; or anybody,
whoever is listening to Māṇdukya Upaniśad
now, you are Viśwa.
Do not ask who is Viśwa anymore.
Okay?
You have got a wonderful Sanskrit name and
Māṇdukya Upaniṣadic name, not a simple
and not an easy name.
Now the Upaniśad is saying something about
which you do not know, which we do not know.
The seventh mantra is really revealing something
fresh and new, to you my dear Viśwa.
So it is a valid proof, pramana vakyam, Upaniṣad
is saying that.
This mantra reveals the central theme of the
Māṇdukya Upaniṣad.
All other mantras are only meant for preparing
you for this main or central theme.
How is the Upaniśad going to reveal the charturtha
pāda, the fourth?
In the other three cases of yours, my dear
Viśwa, what did the Upaniśad say?
It revealed that in case of the first indicator,
you are Viśwa, that means, the consciousness
turned outward and it is associated with the
waking state.
You are Viśwa because you are awake, you
are listening to the class.
Then it revealed that in case of the second
indicator, you are Taijasa, the dreamer, that
means, the consciousness turned inward and
it is associated with the dream state.
Then it revealed that in case of the third
indicator, you are Prājña, that means, the
consciousness is associated with the deep
sleep state.
Now the Upaniśad is going to reveal the Turiyam.
So how will you define it?
You have exhausted all three states, waking,
dreaming and deep sleep state.
Now what will you say?
Normally you will say: Now the Upaniśad revealed
that in case of the fourth indicator or fourth
pādah, you are Turiyam.
That means, the consciousness is associated
with a state.
What state?
We don’t know.
The Upaniṣad does not say that.
Then some people say it is Turiya state.
Some people really say that.
Upaniṣad will refute this.
Here you have made the most harmful error,
if you have said so, that it is a Turiya state.
This is a common error, even many lovers of
Māṇdukya Upaniśad will make such error.
Why?
Because they do not know, what fatal mistake
you will make in your search for your own
real identity.
What fatal mistake you will make if you say
that Turiya is a state.
What fatal mistake are you talking about?
You will drown the ship just when you were
about to reach the parking jetty.
Just little bit remained and you drowned the
ship.
The labour of so much practice or research
will be brought to zero result.
Many people think that Turiya or the fourth
is a fourth state.
Some others will say, this turiya state is
a Samādhi avastha, Samādhi state, that is
called the fourth state.
The consciousness associated with the fourth
state or samādhi, is the chaturtha or the
fourth.
If there is a turiya State, or Turiya avastha
or samādhī state, how should the Upaniśad
define the turiya state?
Do you have experience of it as another state
of yours in your daily life?
You have experience of Turiya state in your
daily life.
You have experience of three states.
You have experience of only three states.
So the Upaniśad called those states as waking
state, dream state and so on.
Those are known facts.
They are known to everyone.
But about the fourth or Turiya, the Upaniśad
does not say that it is Turiya state or Turiya-sthanam.
The Upaniśad does not say that.
Sounds familiar?
I advised you to keep it in mind that when
I say “the Upaniśad does not say this or
that”, then it means that it is not acceptable
as a proof.
So turiya state is not a state.
Right?
Because the Upaniṣad does not say so, Chaturtham
only, not Chaturtha avastha.
Now we will go slowly.
I don’t know how far I can go with this
step by step logic.
If there had been a samādhī state, or a
Turiya state, suppose, the Upaniśad would
have said: samādhī sthanam, or turiya sthanam.
So it is clear that the fourth pādaḥ or
Turiya pādaḥ, is not the consciousness
associated with any particular state.
This is the first and most important point
to remember.
Please follow this process of argument that
will finally lead to your knowing your own
self.
You have to follow it steadily.
The Viśwa will know who you really are!
This is the first point.
And that is what the Upaniṣad wants to reveal
to you.
Then if you don’t remember this that the
Turiya is not a state, what will happen?
Otherwise, otherwise, means, if we accept
that there is a state called Turiya state,
we have to go to a different state for realizing
Turiyam.
Turiya and Turiyam are the same.
Then we will do meditation to reach that state.
That means, we have to realize Turiyam, not
now, but then.
Non-dual Vedānta does not say that your realization
of your Self will have to wait for some other
time.
If you have to go to a different state then
it is not realised now but I will be realised
then.
It will not be realised here but you will
be travelling to some place to realise it
there.
Then we will end up in, what you know?
Sleep state.
We will fall asleep.
Therefore, we should not think that Turiyam
is associated with any particular “state”.
This is the first point.
Now the third point I will make.
Not only that if you say, that Turiyam is
a particular “state” then Turiyam will
also become temporary like any of the other
three states.
Why?
Because any state is temporary.
State means temporary.
A state is fluctuating, waking, dreaming,
deep sleep;
Sometime one is there, and in the next moment
it is not there!
Another state has come.
If Turiya is associated with a fluctuating
or temporary state, it will also be temporary,
not be permanent.
The Upaniśad says that Turiyam, consciousness
is permanent.
What did I say?
“The Upaniśad says that”.
This is therefore indisputable.
There are more of such strong arguments.
We will see them as the occasions arise.
With these three arguments we conclude that,
Upaniśad says that Turiyam is not associated
with any particular state.
Therefore, we should not use the word or phrase,
turiya state or turiya avastha, at all.
The Upaniśad also doesn’t use the word
state, avastha.
Now we go to another argument.
Then what is Turiya?
You say, it is not associated with any particular
state.
Suppose I associate it with the waking state.
Then what mistake do I do?
If you associate it with waking state, then
it is called Viśwa.
Viśwa is the first pāda, the first state.
But the Upaniśad says that Turiya is the
fourth.
Upaniṣad does not say that it is the first.
So how do you connect it to the first.
You cannot!
Because Upaniṣad says it is fourth.
It cannot become the first.
So you cannot do that.
See the logic is so deep and so threadbare.
It is splitting the small, thin thread.
You cannot do that because the Upaniṣad
does not say so.
That’s all.
Then what is Turiyam, the question comes.
Is it identical with the Viśwa, Taijasa and
Prājña or different from them?
O dear!
Why do you ask such a question?
Now the Upaniśad has real difficulty in dealing
with your question.
Do you remember our earlier example?
The child is arguing with mother, “Mom,
why don’t you accept that I am sleeping?!”
See the fallacy!
He is arguing and saying that I am sleeping.
“Why don’t you accept that I am sleeping?”
Let us remember that you, the Viśwa who is
in the waking state, listening to this talk,
are called Taijasa or the dreamer in your
dream state, and the same you are called Prājña
or the sleeper in the deep sleep state.
No.
It is true that the Upaniśad has difficulty;
but it is ready to take up the struggle to
answer your question to your satisfaction.
If the Upaniśad says that it is identical
with Viśwa, Taijasa and Prājña, then why
do you call it the Fourth?
If you say, it is different from them, then
it must be associated with some other “state”!
This is the big difficulty for the upaniṣad
and you have put a very very difficult question,
very intricate and tricky question.
The Upaniśad says: Well, my dear Viśwa,
we can neither say that Turiya is different
from you, nor can we say that it is identical
with you, with Viśwa.
We are going to give you an answer which is:
we are going to say that “it is both”
– i.e. it is identical with you and at the
same time it is different from you.
Now we will use the most common example to
make the idea clear.
Suppose a person has a bangle or bracelet,
a chain, and a ring – all of which are made
of gold.
They are three because they have three different
names, three different forms and three different
use.
Tha bangle will be used on your wrist, the
ring on your finger and the chain around your
neck.
Now suppose I put these three ornaments in
front of you on the table, and say that, I
am going to talk about gold, or give a short
lecture on Gold.
You may think that I am going to talk about
a new thing, a fourth thing, called gold.
Is gold a fourth thing, different from the
ornaments?
Suppose I say that “No, gold is not different
but” identical with any one of these ornaments?
Then I could have said that I am going to
talk about the bangle, or about the chain,
or about the ring!
Why did I say that I am going to talk about
gold?
Why did I say that?
But when I am saying that gold is not identical
with bangle, chain or ring, then I may mean
that gold is different from them.
But you can see that gold is not also different
from these ornaments.
Because you cannot have the ornaments, without
the gold.
Similarly, and this is the crux of the problem,
gold can remain “without” the chain, “without”
the bangle, and “without” the ring.
Gold can remain.
Where does this argument lead us to?
The gold is there in all of the forms, in
all of them
We can now say: the bangle is temporary but
gold is permanent; the chain is temporary
but gold is permanent; the ring is temporary
and the gold is permanent.
Gold is the Turiyam, the underlying consciousness.
Suppose we compare the example like this:
that the bangle is the first pāda or indicator
called Viśwa, the chain is the second indicator
called Taijasa, and the ring is the third
indicator called Prājña.
Gold is different as the permanent reality
which is responsible for the existence of
the three.
It is not different or away in time and space
from these temp things.
It is in them as the permanent gold.
It is permanent because the chain, the bangle,
the ring may disappear.
They are impermanent.
Do you remember in one of our earlier classes
we said that you have to count gold as the
fourth?
But now I have said that you should not count
it as the fourth!!
A big contradiction!
No.
Because “the Upaniśad has said it”.
The Upaniśad has said that it is the fourth.
This data is indisputable.
But why Upaniṣad said it is the fourth?
That will be explained and examined in our
next class.
I cannot go further with this because it has
lot more arguments and the upaniṣad will
not stop until you know.
As Swami Vivekananda has said, “Until you
know that you are God, until you know that
you are this Turiyam, that Consciousness.
Thank you very much!
I stop here, our time is over.
