#144 The Paradox in Vedanta
Our minds are very good at categorical thinking. In fact that is how we learn things in school.
It is either
This or that.
Black or white.
Sukha/Dukha – Pleasure or pain.
Maana /Apamaana – Respect or disrespect
Male/Female
Categorisation as a way of learning gives us certainty. It offers us some way forward of dealing with things and people.
So far so good!
Until we are confronted with nuance, complexity and paradox.
Can a person be both tough and soft?
The police officer who has a tough exterior has a soft side since he cries seeing his children cry.
Can there be more than two emotions you have?
The enthusiasm of travelling abroad to go to university is mixed with the sadness of leaving the familiar behind.
The pain of separating from someone can co-exist with the hope and excitement of getting together with someone else
Can an experience have both pleasure and pain?
The experience of childbirth is rarely pleasurable but the pleasure of having a child can last for a long time.
Can a person be both male and female?
Ardha narishvara is a manifestation of both Shiva-Shakti the masculine and the feminine. In fact, many people these days identify themselves as non-binary.
Was Ravana dharmika or adharmika ?
Ravana had committed the adharma of kidnapping another man’s wife. And yet much earlier through dharmika acts he had gained a boon from Shiva for the tapasya he had performed.
Can a person have the gunas of sattva, rajas and tamas?
Yes. Even if a person is predominantly sattvika, when the person is busy with activity, the person can have rajas backed by sattva. When there is fatigue or sleep, then tamas takes over.
This way of staying with the seeming opposites breaks through our tendency to categorise our experiences.
We find that our anchor of categorising and making sense of the world is now in unsteady waters.
Can a thing be both easy and difficult?
It is easy when you know and difficult when you don’t.
Staying with what seems contradictory involves us letting go of categorical thinking and rushing to find binary answers.
Carl Jung rightly said that paradox presents a more faithful picture of the fullness of life than is possible through our use of logic or reason.
A paradox encourages us to hold the tension of opposites
Vedanta is the only knowledge where our method of knowing things through categorisation stops working for us. Why?
Because words are used for 4 types of categories –
Jati, Guna, kriya and sambandha
Jati is grouping according to similarity. Like apples, oranges, bananas are a part of the fruit world which is different from the group of carrots, cabbage which are a part of the vegetable group. Does Atma, the limitless being belong to a category of things like that? There are no groups of limitlessness to belong to as there is only one limitless.
Guna can be loosely translated as qualities. Descriptions such as fat, thin, tall, short refer to physical appearance. Gunas could be sattva, rajas or tamas. Gunas could also be kind, harsh, honest, dishonest etc. Can Atma be described by gunas? Gunas belong to an object that is limited. Since Brahman is limitless and does not have any parts nor qualities, Brahman cannot be described by qualities either.
Kriya is action. Talking, walking, writing, singing, dancing, praying, revolving all refer to different actions. No. For action one needs to have some limbs which Brahman does not have, as it is limitless. Can Brahman be described by kriya? Brahman illumines all forms. Here illumining is not used in the sense of an action but to reflect its very nature. Just like we say that it is the nature of fire to burn but burning is not a special action. If it was a volitional action then it is possible that the fire may choose to burn sometimes and not burn the other times. So, Brahman does not perform any specific action but that in whose presence all actions can happen.
Sambandha is relationship. A relationship is possible between two entities. Can we describe Brahman as the cause of the world? Yes and No. When we understand Brahman from the lens of the world we can say Yes. But when we understand Brahman without any reference to the world, with reference to itself there can be no sambandha, relationship possible. Just like we say clay is the cause of the pot, from the pot ‘s stand point but from clay’s stand point there are no two categories – clay and pot. There is only clay.
So, Brahman cannot be categorised as either jati, guna, kriya or sambandha.
But the Atma, limitless being that has the body-mind but is other than the body mind and in and through the body-mind, can we categorise it?
In the Upanishad we hear verses like Atma or Brahman is anorniyaan, mahato mahiyaan. It is both smaller than the smallest and bigger than the biggest.
How does one understand it?
Atma is unlike any other object in the world. But every object in the world is endowed with existence which is neither a jati, guna, kriya or sambandha.
Existence always is, much like the white screen of a movie theatre. The different movies appear on it and the screen accordingly looks different.
The object changes but existence never does. The biggest object that we are aware of let’s say a multitude of galaxies change but existence never changes. The tiniest object that we are aware of which may be a virus mutates but Existence does not change. Existence appears as the biggest and the smallest. This existence – is it out there?
This existence or Atma which appears as everything out there or even as your thought forms, is recognisable and present as the very self – sakshi chaitanyam as I, in all living beings – From the greatest form Brahmaji to the smallest worm.
Can you deny that you exist? It is a bit like speaking out – I don’t have a tongue.
You exist. You are self-existent. You don’t need any thinking or categorising to say that you exist. Even the corona virus has a distinct identity and can assert, I am.
I am. This does not depend on the groups I belong to. In fact, I exist and hence this body-mind can belong to groups. But the body-mind that you have can surely belong to different categories of groups according to gender, race, nationality, club, likes, dislikes.
I am. This does not depend on the actions I take or don’t take. In fact, I exist and hence this body-mind can choose to do, not do or do things differently. The body-mind that you have can surely be involved in all kinds of actions all day long – waking up, travelling, speaking, writing, calling, etc
I am. This does not depend on the status or quality of my relationships. In fact, I exist and hence this body-mind can choose to relate more deeply or withdraw or maintain status quo in relationships. The body-mind that you have can surely be related to parents, partner, children, friends, colleagues and so on.
I am. This does not depend on the qualities of my body-mind. In fact, I exist and hence this body-mind can increase or decrease its different qualities. The body-mind that you have can surely have many qualities which are ever changing – fit, strong, analytical, generous, decisive etc
I am – means the Existence that I am cannot be categorised or objectified.
As we stay with the discomfort of the seeming contradiction of two seeming opposites, Vedanta defines us as the reality that always is – free from all categories, free from all limitations.
In the ocean is there both wave and water?
There is only water which appears as the wave or surf depending on the form.
Am I both temporary and eternal?
Body is impermanent and Atma is eternal.
Am I both limited and limitless?
I am limited in appearance and existence in reality.
Is there both duality and oneness?
Duality is at the level of the form and oneness is the reality in and through the forms.
I am existence. All forms appear like ripples in the limitless existence that I am.
