There is great practicality in the teachings of Bhagavad Gīta, since they are based on reasoning.

The Practicality of Bhagavān’s Teachings for Our World

“Sectarianism, bigotry and its horrible descendant, fanaticism, have long possessed this beautiful earth. They have filled the earth with violence, drenched it often and often with human blood, destroyed civilization, and sent whole nations to despair.”^[1] These words from Swāmi Vivekananda’s speech at the World Parliament of Religions in 1893 lamented the damage to human society and evolution wrought by these varied forms of intolerance. Regrettably, his hope that fanaticism in all its forms would henceforth die has proved to be inaccurate. Faced with these forces in our daily lives, what are we to do?

In the context of increasing intolerance and a global pandemic, it is easy to become angry, sad, depressed, and anxious as we contemplate these events, but daily sādhana supports our ability to engage in śravanam, mananam, and nididhyāsana on the nature of sorrow as taught by Lord Kriśṇa. In today’s world, this is extremely relevant. Bhagavān’s very practical solution involves helping us appreciate why sorrow, or śocya, is unjustified under any circumstances. I believe that bigotry and fanaticism are crude attempts to find a genuine sense of self and security in an ever shifting and uncertain world. Therefore, Bhagavān’s teachings regarding the nature of the self and the inappropriateness of sorrow offer hope to humankind with a vision of unity and security that is inherent in us already. And, no extraordinary beliefs are required. Just the ability to employ our minds.

All human beings seek for an escape from the pain of seeing ourselves as a body/mind conglomeration. The problem with the path of seeking is the expectation of some future release that does not exist right now. It implies a joyous experience is not available to me now and that I have to obtain it at some future point. This is a trap. Since the Gīta is the milk of the Upaniśads, Bhagavān’s teachings to Arjuna are not just convincing but transformative for a person who is qualified enough to understand them. 

Bhagavān teaches us the true nature of the self is unchanging, self-effulgent consciousness in all states of experience independent of location or time. Consequently the justification for grief is removed. For the qualified student, realizing that anantam, limitless fullness, is the svarūpa of ‘I’, is only a question of knowledge, not seeking. Recognizing this, even as a basic starting point, is very liberating as a sense of relief washes over and we can rest more assuredly in the completeness of the self. 

In this awareness, there is no justification for śocya. Where is sadness and grief when we know our self as non-different from Brahman, non-different from Iśvara? Bhagavān also impresses upon Arjuna that even if we do experience ourselves as different from Iśvara, śocya is unjustified from the perspective of the jagat because it is the very nature of jagat to change. Being dependent on sat for its very being, the entire jagat is mithyā or asat, having only a relative existence. Its nature is constant change. We can verify this using our own senses. Absolutely everything in the world changes, sometimes at rates so slow we can’t detect the change, but it is happening at an atomic level. Given this realization, what is the justification for sorrow when the world indeed changes? That is its nature so there is no need for sorrow. Additionally, Bhagavān teaches Arjuna that the svarūpa of Ātman is akarta. We are merely actors playing roles. If we confuse ourselves with these many roles, grief results because we think ‘I’ is doing things. If we can be clear ‘I’ is akarta, again there is no justification for grief.

There is great practicality in these teachings since they are based on reasoning. We do need śraddha in śruti that Brahman is satyam, jñānam, anantam, but if we are prepared via karma yoga and have a purified antahkarana, Vedānta śastra as pramāṇa will just ‘work’, just as the eyes work when I open them, validating that initial śraddha.

[1] “Swami Vivekananda’s Speeches at the World ‘s Parliament of Religions, Chicago, 1893.” Belur Math Ramakrishna Math and Ramakrishna Mission, September 11, 2020. https://belurmath.org/swami-vivekananda-speeches-at-the-parliament-of-religions-chicago-1893/.

The post The Practicality of Bhagavan’s Teachings for Our World appeared first on Hindu University of America.

From songs to movies, bumper stickers, tattoos, meditation classes, clothing lines, and yoga sessions, Om is chanted and adorned, but is the meaning of Om actually understood?

To Om or Not to Om?

The symbol Om is used across the globe in highly diverse contexts, and to the typical westerner, carries vague associations with spirituality. From songs to movies, bumper stickers, tattoos, meditation classes, clothing lines, and yoga sessions, Om is chanted and adorned, but is the meaning of Om actually understood? Referring to Om, the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad states, “Om is all this. All this is surely Brahman. This Self is Brahman. The Self, such as It is, is possessed of four quarters.”^[1] This expansive definition of Om is explored in detail using catuṣpāṭ, the four quarters model, overlaid on the letters comprising Om: A-U-M.^[2] This offers an analysis of the same person from different perspectives to illuminate the true nature of the Self as identical with Om. In the process of defining Om, another practical prakriyā is delineated. This essay will explain the traditional meaning of Om and the method of exploration of the meaning in the context of Advaita Vedanta.

The Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad begins describing the first quarter, called Vaiśvānara, as the waking sphere of activity, including all that is tangible and physical in the universe. The self at this state is the knower of objects and knowledge is directed outward. All beings are confused at this level of experience, thinking ‘I’ refers to the body. This prakriyā is reminiscent of the śārīra and kośas methods previously explored, and again points to the practicality of śruti. Śruti then equates Vaiśvānara with the letter A “because of the (similarity of) pervasiveness or being the first.”^[3] In Sanskrit, the letter A is the basis for all further speech. It is the initial sound generated in the throat by opening the mouth and making a sound. It pervades all speech. Similarly, Vaiśvānara pervades the whole manifest universe, thus identifying it with A.

The second quarter is Taijasa, “whose sphere (of activity) is the dream state, whose consciousness is internal…and who enjoys subtle objects.”^[4] Impressions in the mind from waking experiences are impelled to reappear in the dream state. The self is only aware of internal objects as Taijasa, and witnesses cognition by its own luminosity. This sphere of activity is associated with the letter U. The letter U occurs between A and M just as Taijasa is intermediate to Vaiśvānara and the third quarter, Prājña.

Prājña’s sphere of activity is the sleep state, the dreamless state. This is deep sleep, where the person is not enjoying or experiencing anything. In this state, “everything becomes undifferentiated…a mass of mere consciousness.”^[5] This analogy of a mass is meant to convey the idea that the vṛttis in the mind experienced during the waking and dreaming states are totally absent. It is as if a darkness has fallen, covering everything, becoming an indistinguishable mass.^[6] As we have seen in other prakriyās, this is viewed as a state of joy “caused by the absence of the misery involved in the effort of the mind vibrating as the objects and their experiencer.”^[7] In this state we rest in Īśvara as we exist in the causal body and ānandamaya kośa^[8]. However, this is not the bliss of limitlessness itself, because the joy is transitory, not absolute, as well as absolute, and one is not self-aware enough to register one’s freedom from duality at that time.

The letter M corresponds to this third state being the third letter of Om. At the end of the pronunciation of the syllable Om, the letters A and U seem to merge into M and also at the time of origination of Om. This is made sensible by repeating Om. Doing this, the practitioner will realize how A and U merge into M, but also arise out of M to pronounce the syllable again. In the same way, Vaiśvānara and Taijasa merge into Prājña and arise out again as the self moves into the dream and waking states again.

This analysis then leads beyond the letters, the sound, all duality, and any need for attainment to Turīya, the fourth quarter. “The partless Om is Turīya- beyond all conventional dealings, the limit of the negation of the phenomenal world, the auspicious, and the non-dual. Om is thus the Self to be sure. He who knows thus enters the Self through his self.”^[9] Turīya is recognized as what obtains between 2 utterances, oral or mental, of Om. Here is the phala of this prakriyā. Through understanding the meaning of Om and using it as a prakriyā to be meditated on, we are led from understanding ourselves as limited beings, to ourselves as the all-pervasive consciousness, self-existent in all things, all times, all places. Put another way, Om is an upāsanā on Saguna Brahman to bring us back to our svarūpa as ātman, none other than Nirguna Brahman. The Turiya, the silence after the sound of Om, resolves back into the silence of Brahman. But in the same way silence surrounds and pervades the utterance of Om, the Turīya surrounds and pervades the other three quarters. It is always present everywhere. It is not a supra conscious state as some modern Vedanta teachers propose, but rather the ‘I’ that is present in all states. Another way of understanding Om is that the first three states corresponding to A-U-M are incidental, mithyā, and only Turiya, ātman/Brahman, is intrinsic, inheriting in all of them, the satya of all of them. Ātman is satya. This is reminiscent of the definition of Brahman in the Taittiriya Upaniṣad.

The meaning of Om in the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad offers a very different understanding of the syllable compared to common usage in western cultures. Om is aligned with catuṣpāṭ as a means of revealing the all-pervasive nature of ‘I’. This also serves as an upasana leading the aspirant to the negation of all duality, to an understanding of Om as the very nature of Brahman itself as birthless, undecaying, without cause, and without dimension. Quoting Gauḍapāda’s beautiful closing verses of the kārikā, “One should know Om, to be God seated in the hearts of all. Meditating on the all-pervasive Om, the intelligent man grieves no more.”^[10]

ॐ शक्ति ॐ

[1] Gambhirananda, Tr. Swami. Eight Upaniṣads, Volumes I with Śaṅkara-bhāṣya. Advaita Ashrama, 1996. Pg. 175.

[2] Ibid. Pg. 214.

[3] Ibid. Pg. 215.

[4] Ibid. Pg. 180.

[5] Ibid. Pg. 181.

[6] Ibid. Pg. 183.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Swamini Agamananda Saraswati. 2020. Seminar 18. Lecture Notes. Freedom and Reality: An Introduction to Advaita. Hindu University of America. Delivered December 6th, 2020

[9] Gambhirananda, Tr. Swami. Eight Upaniṣads, Volumes I with Śaṅkara-bhāṣya. Advaita Ashrama, 1996. Pg 221-222.

[10] Ibid. Pg. 225.

Cover Picture License: Creative Commons

The post To Om or Not to Om? appeared first on Hindu University of America.

How the Hindu concept of Puruśārtha can help make the world a better place by placing “Pursuit of Happiness” in the right perspective.

The Hindu Paradigm & World Consciousness

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” This quote from the United States Declaration of Independence (DoI) is often pointed to in order to bolster the claim of exceptionalism of the United States and Western culture in general. But what suppositions are implied by this statement, and how can the academic study of Sanatana Dharma function as a counter balance? Specifically, how can the insider voice of the Hindu educated without the historical lens of Orientalism and Indology contribute to the attainment of universal human goals of justice, peace, and respect where the western ideal, as modeled in the Declaration of Independence, has largely failed?

As the colonies finally determined to break from Great Britain due to taxation without representation and the aggressiveness of the British in Boston, they drafted the Declaration as a statement of freedom from the perceived oppression of the king, giving a “powerful voice to the values behind the American Revolution.”1 However, the issue of slavery was omitted, despite evidence that Thomas Jefferson wrote a section to be included condemning the evils of slavery “foisted upon the colonies by the British crown.”2 This omission has cast doubt amongst critics as to the legitimacy of the phrase ‘all men are created equal,’ leaving the question of American exceptionalism up to debate.

However, when viewed through the Hindu lens of puruśārtha, it is argued that something even more damaging to the long term growth of humanity resides in this document that directly correlates to the current state of the United States, with widespread denial of the pandemic, science, and truth. The concept of puruśārtha within Sanatana Dharma denotes the four main human pursuits and describes “that which is longed for by…purusha, the human being.”3 These include dharma, ethics; artha, securities; kāma, pleasures; and mokṣa, liberation.4 The concept of dharma is subtle within Indian thought and includes ethical behavior towards others at every level, social order, cosmic order, sense of duty, service to the community, self-expression, and as a means for mokṣa.5 This all-encompassing term has particular significance for the argument at hand. Artha refers to all things that bring a person a sense of security and includes things like money, power, social status, property, etc. Kāma is sensual pleasure of many different kinds and its attainment is driven both by instinct and personal value systems.6 In this model, dharma serves to restrain or confine the pursuit of artha and kāma, meaning they are not ends in and of themselves, but are an important part of the human experience when seen in the proper context.

The Declaration of Independence states that the pursuit of happiness in an inalienable right assured to us by none other than God. Yet, what is happiness? No definition is provided. Is it assumed that the answer to the fundamental question of human life is exceedingly apparent to the authors? Lost in time, perhaps, is a contextual answer to this question that could have informed the unabashed pursuit of happiness that resulted. Instead, this seminal idea has led to an extreme sense of individual rights and the pursuit of artha and kāma without the restraining and guiding influence of dharma. This has led to a pervasive lack of concern for the wider community beyond one’s immediate family or like-minded neighbors. We need not look further than the fundamentally selfish and irresponsible response of the US to the pandemic. More important than the welfare of the most vulnerable in our country are the ‘inalienable’ rights to not wear a mask and completely disregard science, while simultaneously hold church services, leading to super spreader events and more death. This seminal idea of the righteousness of near total freedom to pursue undefined happiness for the individual insinuated in the opening lines of the DoI has grown into a massive, ostensibly indestructible weed that threatens to breakdown already tenuous ethical concern for others.

Contrast this with puruśārtha, identifying mokṣa as the main goal of human life. Artha, kāma, and dharma all serve this goal. The pursuit of dharma, security, and pleasure are not condemned, but are seen in a much larger context. This world view is counter to that in the US and can serve to provide meaning and structure to all in a society. These goals are open to all. There is freedom implied, but in a way bounded by dharma with an eye to an ultimate goal shared by all humans. There is compassion implied, not just to humans, but to all beings, to the earth. What would the US look like if its citizens had a semblance of these ideas enshrined in the DoI instead?

Here is a model that the insider, the Hindu or adherent to Santana Dharma can offer the West. But, to do so, there is a need for systematized insider education about the worth and tremendous value of these concepts freed from the lens of Indology. Viewing Sanatana Dharma through the lens of the prevailing academic paradigm completely distorts the reality of these traditions and convinces the insider that the ‘truth’ of the outsider is the only voice. This must be reversed. How?

To this day the only person in human history to bring about prodigious change in a completely nonviolent way is Mahatma Gandhi. The core ideas of satyagraha, holding firmly to Truth, can be applied to developing a new paradigm of Hindu thought. Gandhiji’s technique was to force the English to realize the suffering their rule imposed on Indians by absorbing that suffering and reflecting it back to the British. He and his followers allowed the British to experience their own humanity thus freeing them to see the humanity of the Indian, paving the way to independence.

The modern Hindu, educated by the insider with accurate information about the greatness of Bharat in science, mathematics, psychology, astronomy, literature, etc, and a clear understanding of the value of the spiritual, philosophical, and religious traditions of Sanatana Dharma can practice satyagraha in the face of those representing the prevailing paradigm. Holding firm to the Truth and expounding this to others using multimedia campaigns, development of new education systems, and demonstrating a new emergent consciousness of pride in being Hindu will slowly create a sea change. Eventually, the tipping point will be reached, just like Gandhi ji’s work, but this takes a willingness to sacrifice and hold firm. Asking others to change is a recipe for failure. Others will not change entrenched opinions unless the insider changes and demonstrates the gifts of a higher way of being.

A formal system of Hindu education to build a new paradigm to challenge Orientalism and Indology is vitally necessary to prepare the modern Hindu to bring a worldview based on the ‘technologies’ of Bharat to the world. The West has improved artha for millions of people around by producing helpful medical technologies and other products, but this is not enough. The sole pursuit of artha and kāma will only prolong avidya and suffering. We are seeing that now around the world with constant warfare, increasing selfishness, and the fall of dharma. For the advancement of humankind, the clear voice of the Hindu must be heard.

Bibliography

1 Williams, Yohuru. (2020, Jun 29). Why Thomas Jefferson’s Anti-Slavery Passage was removed from the Declaration of Independence. History.

https://www.history.com/news/declaration-of-independence-deleted-anti-slavery-clause- jefferson#:~:text=What%20isn’t%20widely%20known,cut%20from%20the%20final%20wording.

² Ibid

³Swami Dayananda. (1989) Introduction to Vedanta. Vision Books. Pg. 1

⁴Ibid

⁵Author unknown. (2019). Sanatana Dharma handout. Hindu University of America.

⁶Swami Dayananda, Introduction to Vedanta,  Vision Books New Delhi, India 1989 pg 3

Cover Image created in Word Art by JS

The post The Hindu Paradigm & World Consciousness appeared first on Hindu University of America.