
- •Preface
- •The Self and the Absolute
- •References
- •Introduction
- •The Self and the Absolute
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •Self-luminosity of the Self
- •Multiplicity of the Self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •Introduction
- •The Empirical self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •Introduction
- •Introduction
- •Nature of the Self
- •References
- •Introduction
- •The Self and s'iva
- •Introduction.
- •Nature of the Self
- •Introduction
The Self and the Absolute
In many passages of the Upanisads, the individual self is identified with the absolute. The essence in man and the essence of the universe are declared as one and the same. Thus, the Upanisads say, 'That thou art', 'This self is Brahman', 'All is Brahman', 'I am Brahman', 'One who knows Brahman becomes Brahman', 'He who exists in man and he who dwells within the sun are one' and so on16. The Ckandogya Upani-sad says that 'Sat, the Existent, manifested the universe and
, iSI'i
4 The Self in Indian Philosophy
entered into it as the individual self'17. When man realises his-identity with the Absolute, he feels his presence everywhere and finds no distinction between himself and others—living or non-living. Accordingly, in that state there remains no difference between the subject and the object. The $ruti says,. "When all become the atman, who will see, smell, taste, hear, speak, touch, think and know what ?" "When all this becomes the atman, what will he see with what instruments f ,"How can one know the knower ?"18 "There is no plurality here", "One who sacs manifoldness moves from death to death"19, "He who-makes any distinction is haunted by fear, but he who realise identity becomes fearless", "There is no other seer, no other hearer" and so on20. In the Upani$adic view, all differences are created by avidya or ignorance ; when ignorance is destroyed by true knowledge, one feels identity with Brahman and also with everything.
There are some passages in the Upani$ads, which seem to speak of both difference and non-difference between the self and the Absolute. Passages which declare the self as a part of Brahman belong this type. The most important passage of this type runs thus % 'The selves emerge from Brahman like sparks from a blazing fire'21. Passages like 'May I enter thee', 'Thou art my resting place'22 and so on are also to be included in this type. The renowned simile of two birds runs thus: 'Though both the eternal birds rest on the same tree, one of them tastes the fruits and experiences joys and sorrows, while the other does not taste them but simply looks on'2i. The first bird, being deluded by lack of freedom and sovereignty; experiences sorrows, but when it sees the other bird and its glory, it is freed from misery, is purged of merits and demerits, becomes taintless and pure, and realises its absolute equality with it24. Here, the first bird represents the individual self; the second, Brahman, the Universal Self. In this simile, a difference between the individual self and Brahman is admitted,, though absolute equality is said to arise at the end. Accor-
'Whe Self in -the Upanisads 5
dingly, this passage may be regarded as an example of the relation of difference-cum-non-difference between the self and Brahman,
Again, there are some passages in the Upanisads, which •clearly describe the individual self and Brahman as different from each other. Thus, it is said : 'He who controls it (the •self) from within', 'Having entered the heart, the Lord becomes the ruler of the creatures', 'The self attains immortality by 'knowing the inner guide as different from it'. 'The self is dependent and bound', 'The Lord is omniscient and independent, while the self is ignorant and dependent', 'He is the lord of prakfii and the individual selves'25, and so on. The singnifi-cance of all these passages is that the individual self is the doer of actions and enjoyer of happiness and misery, while Brahman is the actions-less witness free from happiness and misery, that the jiva is endowed -with limited power and knowledge, while Brahman has unlimited power and knowledge, and that the self is the controlled, while Brahman is the controller. Accordingly, the self and Brahman are to be regarded as differ-•ent from each other.
Of the later commentators, ^ankara emphasises the 'iden-tity'-texts and propounds the theory of non-dualism, Madhva puts stress upon the 'difference'-texts and propounds dualism, while Nimbarka accepts both these positions and propounds the theory of difference-cum-non-difference.