We revisited this section again and looked at the final verses in some detail. A lot was discovered. This continues from the preceding post. We are now at 15.1:
He said: “This person that is seen in the eye, this is the Self. This is deathless, fearless. This is Brahman. If anybody pours ghee or water into the eye, it always flows to the eyelashes.”
Like the lotus, the eye is not corrupted by what may go into it. But what about this person (purusha) seen in the eye? Three meanings were discussed:
- an image of oneself reflected in the eye
- the Atman is perceptible in the eye – the eye is the window of the soul
- that which is seen when the eye is turned away from sense-objects (awritta-chakshus, “the eye rolling back upon itself” in the Katha Upanishad)
My sense here is that the first is too simple-minded, and the last too sophisticated for this text. The second meaning suggests the compelling characteristic of the Atman – that one can really see it in the eye of another. Compare for example Yajnyawalkya and Maitreyi in the Brihad – the idea that we love another for the sake of the Atman; and that we are rejected by another if we see them as other than the Atman.
Somehow, impossible as it may seem, the straightforward recognition of the Atman in the eye of another is what is meant.
They call him the goal of all attractive things, because all things that are sought after proceed towards him. All things that are sought after proceed towards this one who knows thus.
All attractive or desirable things proceed towards the Atman, in the sense that what we love in the attractive object is the Atman, is already within us.
Furthermore, the desirable things proceed towards whoever has this awareness. Why? Because (as Yajnyawalkya implies) all things love to be recognised as the Atman. We do not want to be identified with our job only, or with our personality only. We want to be regarded as limitless and valuable in ourselves.
This one, again, is indeed the bearer of attractive things, because this one brings all that is sought after. He who knows thus, bears all attractive things.
The same word is used here (vaama) “attractive things” as in the previous verse.
This one, again, is called the bearer of light, because this one shines in all the worlds. He who knows thus, shines in all the worlds.
There is a parallel between the vaamaniih (bearer of attractive things) and bhaamaniih (bearer of light). The rhyme (like Ka and Kha) is suggestive to the Indian mind of a connection.
Now, if again, in the case of this one they perform the last rites or they do not, they verily reach light.
From light he goes to day,
From day to the bright fortnight,
From the bright fortnight he goes to the six months in which the sun moves northward,
From these months to the year,
From the year to the sun,
From the sun to the moon,
From the moon to lightning.
There, an inhuman spirit leads those who are there to Brahma. This is the divine path, the path of Brahma. Having reached there, they do not return to this whirl of Manu.
The final verse repeats part of the teaching about reincarnation that is set out in Chandogya V, which I believe is a quotation from the Brihad. Here, we are not concerned with those that take the other two paths - the dark path for those of good conduct leading to heaven and rebirth, and the darker path of the sinful leading to rebirth as lower creatures and insects - but only with the path of light leading to Brahmaloka. The spirit goes from light to light, finally becoming lightning.
I'm not sure whether 'Brahman' is masculine or neuter - the latter would indicate the Absolute, the former a more theistic idea.
NB that last rites are unnecessary for the knower of the Atman. There can be no clearer indication of the distinction between the ritualistic idea of the Vedas and the more philosophical Upanishads.
The "inhuman spirit" suggests a guardian entity that belongs to a higher realm than than of Manu (the first man?). The phrase "the whirl of Manu" is very striking!
No comments:
Post a Comment