INTRODUCTORY SPEECH TO THE INTELLECTUAL WORKSHOP ON VEDANTA DARSHANA

INTRODUCTORY SPEECH  TO  THE  INTELLECTUAL

WORKSHOP  ON  VEDANTA  DARSHANA

(Prepared Speech by Swami Sadasiva Giri)

(Conducted on the 7th, 8th and 9th of June, 2019 under the auspices of Vishnu          Mohan Foundation, Shri Gnana Adwaita Peetham and the Madras Sanskrit College)

 गुरुर्ब्रह्मा    गुरुर्विष्णु    -    र्गुरुर्देवो   महेश्वरः |

गुरुस्साक्षात्परं   ब्रह्म   तस्मै   श्रीगुरवे   नमः  ||

The idea to remain in the midst of this INTELLECTUAL WORKSHOP came up in my mind towards the end of this past April, 2019-April.  Subsequently it was shared with Dr. Srinivasan and later with our Guru-Bhai and guide in charge of श्रीज्ञान-अद्वैत-पीठम्, our beloved Shrihariprasad Swami.  I firmly believe, it could have occurred only by the internal prompting of our revered and most beloved Sadguru, Her Holiness Swami Gnanananda Saraswati.  I have remained closely linked with this Redeemer cum Path Breaker-Saint of Kali-Yuga ever since May, 1977 i.e. 42 years ago, till her Maha-Samadhi in October, 2016.  During those early days, she used to say often to her inner circle of devotees that her teaching was mainly based on Adwaitic Philosophy with a rider that "the final goal should be reached through the means of SHARANAAGATI alone".  Presently, there is a notion, quite vibrant in nature,  among the followers of Gnana Maarga  that  Sharanagati  is not required for them.  They think that the followers of Bhakti Maarga  alone require it.  In this regard, I have the direct knowledge of some celebrities among the former category having stated in unequivocal terms as "Surrender to whom?  Who is there other than me, for me to surrender?"  The Mahaa-Vaakya of "अहं ब्रह्मास्मि", "I am the all pervading Brahman" is understood by them as "the individual I is verily the Brahman."  What a pity!  Such people are the great preceptors, with great following also, for students of philosophy.   

This term of Sharanagati is nothing but the unconditional and total surrender of a Jeevatman to the inviolable will of Paramatman. Reference is made in this regard.  (ऊर्जित-शासनः - 910th नाम in विष्णु-सहस्रनाम-स्तोत्रं, सर्वानुल्लङ्घ्यशासना 995th नाम in ललिता-सहस्रनाम-स्तोत्रं "The ONE possessing  inviolable commands everywhere and at all times")  This Sharanagati is hailed and extolled highly as Prapatti in Vishishta-Adwaita Darshana (Adwaita with a distinction), around which this branch of theology distinguishes itself and revolves and evolves further.  Here, the concept of Paramatman could be in a tangible form of a Guru or in an intangible form of God, as both are the same in the ultimate sense, for all practical purposes.  For the very highly evolved Souls like Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, the Guru would be within oneself and for the average lesser ones, the Guru has to be without, in other words, in a tangible external form.  Without doing Sharanagati consciously to this inviolable authority, the ego of the Jeevatman will never allow an aspirant of Moksha to transcend the realm of duality.  This concept of Sharanagati is common and mandatory for both categories, those treading the path leading to the formless Ultimate Truth, stated in Bhagavad Geeta as the path of Avyakta, (the Intangible - अव्यक्तासक्त-चेतसां BG ch.12/stanza.5) and for the Bhaktas, the pursuers of the various forms of Godhead, stated as ARCHA-AVATAARA-MURTIS (Archa in brief), in other words, the idol-forms of God.  (In Shri Vaishnavism it is believed and accepted that Bhagavan, the Godhead, descends to the empirical plane as Rama, Krishna, Narasimha, etc. and also descends into the idol-forms, to bless and guide the seekers among humanity.)  The Archa is a symbol of Paramatman and that could be a stone sculpture, a piece of timber as seen in Puri Jagannath (Orissa) or even a pictorial form of a painting on a wall or on a piece of canvass.   

The most shining Sage of the 20th Century AD, Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi, has highlighted the paramount importance of Sharanagati through his immortal teachings which are available today in the form of "TALKS" with Bhagavan.  In page 240 (last two lines) of "Talks" (3rd Edition - 2013) it is clearly stated that the Self in Gnana Maarga is the God in Bhakti Maarga and Sharanagati is commonly mandatory for both the paths. 

This topic of Sharanagati gets explained further clearly, through the very famous hymn of Gurvashtakam sung by Acharya Bhagavatpaada, who is generally referred to as Shankara by the modern tribe of intellectuals.  (Shankara is the name bestowed upon him by his biological parents and Bhagavatpaada is his monastic name, showing his Guru-Parampara, in the lineage of Gaudapaada and Govindapaada). In the fourth quarter of each stanza of the hymn, गुर्वष्टकं, consisting of eight stanzas, Shankara emphatically stresses the importance of Sharanagati by repeating this concept, "मनश्चेन्नलग्नं गुरोरङ्घ्रिपद्मे ततः किं ततः किं ततः किं ततः किम्".   (This repetition in each stanza makes it 32 times in the entire hymn.)  "If the mind doesn't cling to the Holy Lotus Feet of the Sad-Guru-Maharaj, steadfast, leaving alone everything else one could aspire for, what is the use of attaining and possessing all else in this world?"  Without doing Sharanagati at the Holy Lotus Feet of the Sad-Guru, all else one could aspire for, in this world and beyond, and one could possess, become mere tinsel worthy of no mention, as all these material prosperity, the laudable sublime virtues and even the rarest of rare spellbinding Siddhis (miraculous powers) will help a Jeevaatman to earn repeated and endless transmigration alone and would never help him to annihilate the ego and to attain the invaluable state of MOKSHA. (It would help one to earn only  transmigration - पुनरपि जननं पुनरपि मरणं पुनरपि जननी-जठरे शयनम् - endlessly.  This would be the end result accruing from a life, without doing Sharanagati.)  The state of MOKSHA, a state of total freedom from all bondages, brings an end to all the miseries of the world, never to return again.  Will the entire wealth of the world, put together, can have any value without a Spirit behind it, to utilise it judiciously?  When the body falls unexpectedly, without any prior notice, all the wealth, attached to the owner of the body till then, doesn't get  carried forward to the same owner in a new body.  This is the important issue and import of this topic to be remembered by all and as such, it is the gist of Shankara's statement in Gurvashtakam "मनश्चेन्नलग्नं गुरोरङ्घ्रिपद्मे ततः किं ततः किं ततः किं ततः किम् "|

As time evolved from Shankara's period, which the modern historians have fixed as 7th century AD, the philosophy expounded by Shankara started progressing in two separate directions as two branches, probably never to meet again, in the opinion of some intellectuals.  One of the two branches is the Saguna Path (Bhakti Maarga) and the other is the Nirguna Path (Gnana Maarga).  In the view of Shankara, these two paths are not at all contradictory to each other.  Instead, they are very much complimentary to each other, as they happen to be the two facets of a wholesome single unit.  The aspirants guided naturally, by reason (logical thinking) can pursue the Gnana Maarga and the aspirants instinctively guided by faith and feeling, can follow the Bhakti Maarga, the path of love.  If it is not so, Shankara would not have endeavoured so much to promote Bhakti Maarga by composing those voluminous Bhakti-literature, mostly in verses, which are easy to remember and ruminate upon.  The quality of Shankara's devotional literature is earning him great approval and adoration from the class of Rhetoricians.  They evaluate the  "रस, ध्वनि, अलङ्कार, वृत्त, रीति, पाक" and various other intricacies and subtleties involved in Shankara's Bhakti-literature as something superb and unparalleled, thereby stamping and proclaiming it with the title of a perfect literature (उत्तमं काव्यम्), as per the standards of rating available in Rhetoric.  The medium of Rhetoric is the ideal means to carry the sentiment of Bhakti into the hearts of the masses at large, who are basically and practically various bundles of emotions, sensations and sentiments, not at all bothered by reason, in other words logic.  Generally they would be more guileless and unassuming when they are compared with the class of intellectuals who are generally cunning and crafty.   

Some intellectuals treading the Nirguna Path, even gather courage to declare that the vast and rich collections of Shankara's STOTRA literature, that are both mellifluent and heart-melting in nature (in Bhagavan Ramana's words "bone-melting") cannot be accepted as Shankara's original works, in the true sense.  They usually say that they should be the interpolated versions which crept into the original collections of Shaankara-literature gradually, during later times, when the succeeding chain of pontiffs called Shankaracharyas adorned the thrones (पीठं) of the आम्नाय Mutts established by Shankara.  As anything attributed to Shankara's name alone would earn the approval and acceptance, among the masses and even among some intellectuals, the succeeding chain of pontiffs, without bringing themselves formally into the limelight, carried out this interpolation, out of necessity.  This is their stand. 

They would also put a question to the intellectual community as to "how a person who wrote the Illustrious Bhaashya for Brahma Sutras could compose these devotional hymns which are generally silly in the consideration and evaluation of theologians?"  They say that Bhakti-literature is meant for the lesser evolved masses and the Prasthana-Traya-Bhaashya is meant for them, who are the highly evolved class.  (As they have not developed sufficient love in their hearts they cannot understand what Bhakti is.  It is needless to talk about the heart-melting and bone-melting love of the Para-Bhaktas, which even the great Masters like Ramana Maharshi endorse fully.)  See the height of their intellectual haughtiness, the विद्या-गर्वम्.   This class want to voluntarily assume the roles of judges and critics of even Shankara and his illustrious writings on Gnana-Maarga and Bhakti-Maarga.  They think that theirs is the final word on all aspects of theology and the knowledge of the Self.  They feel that self realisation is their exclusive prerogative.

The genius par excellence, the legendary Vaachaspati Mishra, through his illustrious commentary on Shaankara-Bhaashya for Brahma Sutras, widely extolled as BHAAMATI, treaded and propagated the path of Nirguna as he had developed a firm identity, a good likeness, with the cosmic विज्ञानात्मन्.  [When reason and thinking get developed to its highest limits in a person, the other side of the same coin, namely faith and feeling (love) remain greatly underdeveloped.  This state would create a serious imbalance in a person's perception and general outlook - just similar to remaining in an ivory tower, not being bothered about the outside world.  It is but natural, in a sense.  Similarly when love is developed without the backing of sensible reason, it will naturally turn into a state of subjective thinking, of wild and blind passion.  This is another type of mental imbalance.] 

In this context, when the readers go through this statement of mine, they should not come to a premature conclusion that, out of prejudice, I am of the opinion that Vaachaspati Mishra's achievement is ordinary and not worthy of adoration.  But actually it is not so.  It is exceptionally brilliant without any doubt.  His total dedication to writing a commentary on Shankara's Bhaashya would have few parallels in the history of the literary world.  Only scholars of the calibre of Dr. Krishnamurthy Saastrigal, who is sitting in our midst now, attached with many rare decorations such as Maha-Mahopaadhyaaya and the like and who are Gyaana-Vriddhas and Vayo-Vriddhas (ripe in Gnana and longevity of the body) can digest Bhamati properly and their number is dwindling fast, as time evolves.  It is not for the lesser ones to go anywhere near Bhamati and its author.  Those who are well versed in the Shad-Darshanas of Saankhya, Yoga, Poorva and Uttara-Meemaamsas, Nyaya, Vyseshika and even other branches such as Baudha etc. and who are possessing sharp intellects, can digest Bhamati.  The hair-splitting logic involved in it from beginning to end would take an average person to the state of instant सुषुप्ति i.e. deep sleep, without any effort on his part.  It would be extremely difficult to keep the mind awake and attentive when an unwelcome subject is presented in front of it. The mind instinctively wants to remain in a mood of tension-free recreation always. 

Now let us come back to the author of Bhamati.  If Vachaspati Mishra would have evolved beyond विज्ञानात्मन् he would have definitely realised and also confessed that आनन्दमय, a synonym of सगुणब्रह्मन्, is also a valid state of experience  in the evolutionary process of a Jeevaatman.  But in that case, as आनन्दमय  has no doership (कर्तृत्वं) at all, he could not have written the famous commentary of Bhamati through his personal effort.  He would no more be an individual when he transcends the state of विज्ञानात्मन्.  The blissful आनन्दमय has only enjoyer-ship (भोक्तृत्वं) to enjoy the bliss eternal which is springing from within, axiomatically.  (रसो वै सः | रसं ह्येवायं लब्ध्वाऽनन्दी भवति Anandamaya is verily Rasa (bliss).  Deriving the Rasa from within He becomes immensely blissful. vide Taittireeyopanishat) A person, after attaining his identity with आनन्दमय will usually remain in a state of Mahaa-Bhaava which is neither remaining in Vyavahara nor remaining in Nirvikalpa-Samadhi.  It is a state in between these two - a state similar to remaining in trance, where the mind is introverted, at the same time remaining active. 

But Shankara's case, at the time of writing the Bhaashya on Prasthana-Traya  is totally different.  The Cosmic Will of Paramatman utilises such purified and perfected Souls as Its medium (a robot in the modern sense) to effect great reforms in the universe.  In this case, remaining as a medium of Cosmic Vigyaanaatman, Shankara has written those Bhaashyas (the unambiguous explanations) for Prasthana-Traya (the trinity of श्रुति, स्मृति, न्याय) and has composed those Bhakti Kaavyas in an extempore style altogether, without any individual effort on his part as he ceased to be an individual while writing those great intellectual treatises.  

Here what we should understand is that आनन्दमय, The Blissful, is not the ultimate state of spiritual evolution.  But at the same time, it is not the state of Vyavahara, where the Gunas of Satva, Rajas and Tamas are vibrant.  It is the Shuddha Satva state, devoid of Rajo-Guna and Tamo-Guna.  आनन्दमय is light consciousness, the first stage of evolution of  Paramaatman where there is only effulgence, (confirmation from Scriptures presented)

(न  तत्र  सूर्यो भाति  न  चन्द्र-तारकं  नेमा विद्युतो भान्ति  कुतोऽयमग्निः |

तमेव    भान्तमनुभाति     सर्वं       तस्य    भासा   सर्वमिदमं   विभाति  ||  )

                                          Mantra 15, Valli 2, Chapter 2 of Kathopanishat

["There, the Sun doesn't shine, neither do the Moon and the Stars; nor do these blinding flashes of lightning remain effulgent there.  In that case what remains to be mentioned of this poor fellow, the fire-god?  All these objects remain luminous as He (the Subject) remains ever self-effulgent. Through His self-effulgence which is axiomatic, all these objects remain luminous, in various proportions, according to their levels of purity ."]

limitless bliss and its enjoyer.  This rare blissful experience is mentioned in theological references as Brahmaanandam, Satchidaanandam, etc.  In the realm of Para-Brahman, neither there is unbounded bliss nor its enjoyer.  The realm of आनन्दमय, The Blissful, acts as a transit camp for the ardent seekers of the Ultimate Truth to refresh themselves for a while, gathering more and more nervous strength, before finally proceeding further towards the ultimate perfected state which is devoid of all inherent Vaasanaas. 

The evolutionary progression through the Nirguna Path, without touching this transit camp is also possible.  But it is earmarked for a selected few only. Without attaining sufficient Vairaagya, it is not at all possible to tread this path as it is extremely hazardous and heart-breaking for the average seekers of Paramatman.  In many Scriptures it is confirmed in unequivocal terms.  For example, The Kathopanishat says "क्षुरस्य धारा निशिता दुरत्यया दुर्गं पथस्तत्कवयो वदन्ति" "Treading this path of Nirguna is nothing but walking on the razor's edge" Canto III, Part I, Mantra 14.  Bhagavad-Geeta says "क्लेशोऽधिकतरस्तेषा-मव्यक्तासक्तचेतसाम् | अव्यक्ता हि गतिर्दुःखं देहवद्भिरवाप्यते"|| "This path of Avyakta, the Intangible, in other words, Nirguna is extremely difficult and also heart-breaking for the body-conscious tribe" BG. ch. 12, stanza 5.  In Kali Yuga, the Dark Age, [due to the overwhelming impact of Tamo-Guna (combined with Rajo-Guna) in the intellect which veils the Self to create अन्यथा-ज्ञानम् viz. the diametrically opposite notion] body-consciousness is at its zenith.  Therefore, for this body-conscious tribe of humankind, this path of Nirguna is too hazardous and almost unthinkable if not totally impossible.

Our Sadguru Amma (born and brought up with her aristocratic background acting as a serious obstacle) has treaded this path of Nirguna, living in the midst of a family life with husband and children, fulfilling the duties of a house-holder.  This could be compared to swimming against the current of the Amazon.  In the case of the legendary Yaagnyavalkya of Shukla Yajur-Veda fame (who is the Mantra-Drashta of Shukla Yajurveda, by remaining as a medium of Paramaatman) we come across a parallel to our beloved Sadguru Amma. We can grasp the story of Yaagnyavalkya from the Brihadaaranyakopanishat. They belong to the rarest of the rare cases category.  Their case cannot be considered as a standard while conducting comparative studies with other Realised Souls.  When we try to understand this issue from a more realistic angle, the more distinguished nature of Sadguru Amma's Sadhana would become clear and more convincing.  Yaagnyavalkya's story  belongs to a far ancient period of Treta-Yuga when Tamo-Guna was not ruling supreme to create obstacles to the seekers of Paramaatman, as it does in Kali Yuga.     

         

Again back to our earlier topic.  The Legend says that Vachaspati Mishra, forgetting this empirical realm of existence completely, focussed his entire energies in writing his commentary, without giving a thought to his (नवोढ-वधू) newly wedded bride, Bhamati, and without giving a thought to lead a legitimate family life with her.  As per Sanatana Dharma, one is required to beget at least a son before leaving this world of mortals, if one is destined to be a householder.  It is a binding duty.  The injunction of स्मृति i.e. Codes prescribed by the great Seers (यदहरेव विरजेत् तदहरेव प्रव्रजेत्)  "the moment one attains perfect वैराग्य i.e. total aversion to this worldly life" doesn't apply here in his case.  If all the Karma is exhausted and (पाप-पुण्य-समत्वं) balance of merit and demerit is earned by an individual, शक्ति-निपात, another term for descend of GRACE, will occur in the normal course, which will infuse tremendous Vairaagya, thereby introverting the mind and taking it to the culmination of self-realisation.  That spiritual progress was not achieved in his case and that is the reason for the imbalance here which prevented him from intuiting the Self (आत्म-साक्षात्कार). Bhagavad Geeta in simple and unambiguous terms declares "युक्ताहारविहारस्य युक्तचेष्टस्य कर्मसु | युक्तस्वप्ना-वबोधस्य योगो भवति दुःखहा ||  B.G. ch.6 stanza.17.  "To one, whose food habits and movements are well regulated, whose endeavour in works is moderate and whose sleep and wakefulness are temperate, to such a person comes the immortal YOGA, the destroyer of all miseries and sorrows."   The paramount importance of taking to a middle of the road path and its pursuance is emphatically stated here, for intuiting the Self.     

Today, many pursuers of Vedanta (males and females) want the comfort and security of a normal family life without renouncing anything and also without getting married formally (calling themselves as (नैष्ठिक-ब्रह्मचारिणः) perpetual celibates, virgins, spinsters etc.) and without begetting children, as this would bring burdens, responsibilities, obstacles and miseries with it, to one's spiritual pursuits, as per their opinion.  To get cured of the dreaded disease of भव-रोग i.e. transmigration, they want to consume only sweet pills of their personal choice, never bitter pills.  Will it be ever possible?  It is not for the patients to choose the medicine; it is always for the doctor (in this context the Sadguru) to prescribe the medicine.  This type of aspirants never develop strong Vairaagya which is a mandatory pre-requisite for intuiting one's Swaroopa, own Self, as inseparably one with Paramaatman.  

When Vachaspati Mishra recollected this anomaly on his part, belatedly, it was too late for his wife to conceive and beget him a son.  This is what I grasp from the legendary story of Vaachaspati Mishra which fully agrees with reason and commonsense.   There are varying versions of the story.  In such a situation, to pacify her and to keep her in good mental mood, he gave her very name of BHAMATI to his illustrious commentary for Brahma Sutras, as he could not find any other means to repay her for her selfless service.

As Vedanta became dry and cold by progressing through the Nirguna Path for some centuries from Shankara's period, slowly and steadily, a state of great imbalance and impracticality crept into it.  And to rebalance this state and to rejuvenate Vedanta Sadhana, the same Shankara had to assume another नाम and रूप (name and form) in the name and form of Acharya Ramanuja.  Shankara's and Ramanuja's Jayanti celebrations coincide mostly on the same day, every year.  (I am stating it here to show their oneness.)  If it differs, during some years by one day, it  would be due to the difference of criterion  involved  in fixing the Jayanti-day - Vaishakha Shukla Panchami in Shankara's case and the Asterism of Aardra in Ramanuja's case.  The birth star of both Acharyas was inevitably Aardra only.  If they happened to be contemporaries, one could surely say, they are not the same, but two different entities.  Here, in the case of both, there was no ego or individual freewill as both were two different facets of the same Truth of परमात्मन्.  Only the Cosmic Will (in their case, the Cosmic Vigyaanaatman which has a small extent of Rajo Guna with predominant Satva Guna to undertake any intellectual work) acted through both of them when they wrote their philosophies and there is only one cosmic will for the entire cosmos.  That is why it is stated by me that they are not two different entities altogether.  Ramanuja brought back practicality and substance into Vedanta Darshana when it became almost lifeless and impractical.  The principle and methodology suitable for one particular time and environment cannot be the same, in sanity and appropriacy, for another time.  It is almost the same like the cold-water bath, felt most welcome and suitable during summer, turning totally hostile and inimical during winter, causing rheumatic pain.     

Vedanta Darshana has another view also from good old times, which is much earlier to Ramanuja's, which is forgotten now.  Its origin cannot be traced back to any particular era as it is another side of the same coin of Vedanta like Dakshinamurti and Nataraja remaining as two sides of the Ultimate Truth.   One side of Vedanta is projected as Gnaana Maarga leading an aspirant to Nirguna Brahman and the other side as Bhakti Maarga leading to Saguna Brahman.  Today, for all practical purposes, the second view of Vedanta Darshana i.e. Saguna Brahman, which is inseparable from Bhakti Maarga, is attributed to Padmapada Acharya, a direct disciple of Acharya Shankara (whose name of Padmapada belongs to the गौण category) having come into the notice of the world,  stamping his unparalleled Guru Bhakti, by walking over the water surface of the divine river Ganga at the unexpected call of his Guru, Shankara, from the opposite bank.  It occurred by the will of Vidya Maya (which is full of guiles and tricks) to demonstrate to the world that Guru Bhakti, at its zenith, would bring about a total loss of body consciousness and body weight.  (Today it is well known that body can levitate through the mastery of Praanaayaama and some of such Tantric practices.  The pursuers of transcendental meditation taught by Maharshi Mahesh Yogi have demonstrated this levitation of the body to the world.)  Padmapada's unconditional and total surrender to his Guru, Shankara, is clearly evident from this legendary story and as such, we can firmly believe that he had the direct experience of his transcendental Self when he wrote his commentary on Shankara's Bhaashya for the Brahma Sutras, which is hailed as पञ्चपादिका-व्याख्यानम्.  Today, a predominantly large section of aspirants treading the Path of Vedanta remains unaware of this commentary, its author and its view of Vedanta Darshana.

Unfortunately with the long passage of time, the commentary of Padmapada is available for the first four topics (अधिकरण) only, today.  The rest of the commentary remains unavailable as it seems to have been lost.  Despite that, still, we can make out the view maintained by Padmapada Acharya clearly, from the available portion of his commentary on Brahma Sutras, today. 

Here, we can naturally conclude that the view of  Padmapada Acharya could be and should be more mature, practical, agreeable to commonsense and also to अनुभव i.e. one's direct experience.  Padmapada confesses that the experience of Saguna Brahman is also valid in the evolutionary process of a Jeevaatman and as such acceptable to Vedanta Darshana. It is a welcome change and deviation from the view of Bhamati.  What does this view of Pancha-Paadika imply?  If Saguna Brahman can be welcome and agreeable to Vedanta Darshana, the path of Bhakti which is totally inseparable from the concept of Saguna Brahman, also becomes fully acceptable and valid to this school's view in Vedanta Darshana.

In fact, the sixth topic of आनन्दमयाधिकरणम् and the first Sutra placed therein namely, आनन्दमयोऽभ्यासात् is the clear evidence of the acceptance of Saguna Brahman in Vedanta Darshana by Sage Baadaraayana, the composer of the Vedanta Sutras.  Otherwise, why should it be placed in the sequence of Sutras commencing from the first topic of जिज्ञासाऽधिकरणं without proposing a deviation anywhere?  Actually no deviation from the earlier sequence of topics is proposed when the topic of आनन्दमयाधिकरणम् is introduced and as such, the starting Sutra of आनन्दमयोऽभ्यासात्, should mean that "आनन्दमय is to be understood as Brahman" taking into account the repeated and carried forward discussions of (Para) Brahman in the earlier five (अधिकरण) topics.

      

As Saguna Brahman is not the Ultimate Truth agreeable to the definition of प्रपञ्चोपशमं, शान्तं, शिवं, and अद्वैतं stated in माण्डूक्योपनिषत्, Shankara explained the topic of आनन्दमयाधिकरणम् as two different perceptions or views of Vedanta Darshana, one after the other.  The Bhakti-Maarga's view is presented initially and the Gnana-Maarga's view is explained subsequently, in the traditional style of Purva-Paksha first and Siddhaanta-Paksha later.  All the Sutras in this अधिकरण  i.e. topic are compatible to Vishishta-Adwaita Philosophy only and not at all compatible to Adwaita Philosophy.  But in this अधिकरण i.e. topic, as पर-ब्रह्मन् is the अनुवर्तित-विषय i.e. topic of discussion brought forward from the successive earlier Sutras, starting from the first Sutra, (अथातोऽब्रह्म-जिज्ञासा, जन्माद्यस्य यतः, शास्त्रयोनित्वात्, तत्तु समन्वयात्, ईक्षतेर्नाशब्दम्) the सच्चिदानन्द-ब्रह्मन्, in other words, आनन्दमय would not fit in, here, in this sequence of discussion.  That is the actual and only reason for Shankara to write a discordant note in this topic of आनन्दमयाधिकरणम्.  It should not be construed by the followers of Gnaana Maarga that Shankara never accepted the validity of सगुण-ब्रह्मन्, which is intuited by the class of Bhaktas in the evolutionary process.  In this context, there is a difference of perception between Shankara and Ramanuja.  Difference of perception will not bring about any change in the Truth intuited.  It is like our Globe Earth appearing as various entities when perceived from the surface of the Earth and the same Earth appearing as a colossal whirling sapphire stone embedded with gold at many places when perceived from Earth's Moon.  

 

In accordance with विशिष्टाद्वैत, "the philosophy of Adwaita with a distinction", Ramanuja explained the whole topic of आनन्दमयाधिकरणम् keeping Saguna Brahman at the centre, as its main subject and topic of discussion.  In this branch of Vedanta Darshana सगुण-ब्रह्मन् is the Ultimate Truth to be intuited, according to some Vaishnava scholars.  All differences will disappear if any form of Brahman (Saguna or Nirguna) is intuited.

Without prejudice, in the least, we should understand that it is the finite intellect which tries to explain the infinite state of being as Saguna Brahman or as Nirguna Brahman or as something still different from these two.  Therefore, any way you put it, it has to be with some flaw somewhere.  When that Ultimate Truth is beyond the realm of thought and words (यतो वाचो निवर्तन्ते | अप्राप्य मनसा सह | vide तैत्तिरीयोपनिषत् Canto II/Topic 4) how can that Ultimate Truth be explained without any flaw, in words?  When we bring it to the realm of Vyavahara i.e. duality (as absolute cannot be explained in words; it can only be intuited) and try to explain it, with the help of some preconceived notions the statement automatically gets polluted  without any doubt.  With the help of a bushel one cannot ascertain the quantity of water in the vast ocean.  As such, any view conducive for the spiritual progress and benefit of the masses at large, should be welcome and acceptable for the men of wisdom; Padmapada Acharya shows that acceptance only in his commentary. 

What I am trying to highlight here is that the philosophy that we follow should be compatible to the requirement of any particular time  and environ-ment, as far as theory and practice are concerned.  Shankara gives para-mount importance to अनुभव, the direct and axiomatic experience, sidelining even theory on certain rare occasions.  He writes on one such occasion that "a thousand similar श्रुतिवाक्यानि i.e. Upanishadic statements will not become प्रमाण i.e. a valid proof, if the विद्वद्-अनुभव i.e. the direct experience of the men of wisdom is contrary to it.  Thousand Vedic statements (श्रुतिवाक्यानि) may say that the attribute of fire is cold; but it will never become a valid proof, by merely being an Upanishadic statement when the attribute of fire is directly experienced, quite contrary to it."

As the present intellectual community is under the firm conviction that the path of Vedanta is verily the Nirguna Path, we have to enlighten them that Bhakti Maarga is also fully acceptable to Vedanta Darshana as it is another view of the same Vedanta Darshana which, unfortunately, has remained dormant since quite some time.  This is due to the strong influence of the western civilisation through its system of education, fashion, dress code, medical practice and finally the democratic system of administration which, with all factors put together, promotes rationality in our thinking and in each step of our daily life, never allowing faith in Scriptures and Vairaagya to gain a strong foot-hold in our mind and daily life.  Actually, there is no contra-diction between Bhakti and Vedanta.  Both remain complimentary to each other.  Both, when combined together becomes a wholesome single unit (वागर्थाविव संपृक्तौ vide Raghuvamsa of Poet Kalidasa) like the principle of Shankara-Narayana, Ardha-Nareeshwara and Parvathy-Parameshwara.  We cannot separate Bhakti from Vedanta or Vedanta from Bhakti.  Without Bhakti, Vedanta becomes without substance and as such, impractical.  Similarly  without the backing and constant support of Vedanta, Bhakti becomes mere bigotry and totally misleading, as we see it in practical terms, in the popular religious Faiths of Islam and Christianity today, which are not supported by a sensible and proper philosophy, the result of which prompts the followers of those Faiths to engage in Jihad and conversions.

The academician-scholars are going to present a great intellectual feast in front of us during the three days from today and all are requested to participate in this feast benefitting themselves according to the extent of their capability.  Let the youngsters convert this opportunity to their best advantage and utility.  This type of Intellectual Workshops are not conducted often and as such, its utility value becomes unimaginably high.  Let us reflect and ruminate repeatedly over this Upanishad-Mantra.

नायमात्मा            प्रवचनेन           लभ्यो ,     

  न      मेधया,          न       बहुना      श्रुतेन |

यमेवैष          वृणुते         तेन         लभ्य  -  

स्तस्यैष   आत्मा   विवृणुते   तनूं   स्वाम् ||

                                         (कठोपनिषत् Canto II, Part I, Mantra 23)

"This Atman cannot be intuited by delivering discourses; neither by possessing a sharp intellect, nor by repeated listening to discourses.  He who dedicates himself wholeheartedly, sacrificing his everything including his individuality and freewill totally, intuits this Aatman from within without anyone's help or agency. (Another view - He intuits this Ultimate Truth whom this Aatman chooses as someone worthy to be revealed.)  To such a person this Aatman reveals Itself from within, axiomatically."  OM.