Thus Spake the Divine - Kannan said it, Kamban also said it!

Thus Spake the Divine

Kannan said it, Kamban also said it!

In this chapter, Poojyasri Maha Periyava elucidates the concept of the Brahmam, using the quotes of Lord Krishna from Gita and Kamban from Ramayana.

The source for all substances in this Cosmos is the Atma and Atma exists beyond everything. How is it possible? Sri Krishna, in Bhagavad Gita, confuses people with obscure statements and finally he himself elucidates with clarity and makes things quite clear.

In Bhagavad Gita, Krishna utters in one place, “I reside in all the things, and all the things reside within me.” If all the things reside within Him, it means that He is the Atma, who is the source of creation of all things. But, when he says, He resides in all things, will that not mean that those things form the source of creation of Him? It may be confusing what is right and what is wrong between these two statements.

It is only correct to say that God or Atma is the source of everything. Just because He exists in all substances does not mean that they are the source of His existence. Only because of God, they have the body and the breath. Without Him, they don’t exist. Therefore, they are not the source for Him. He is the one who controls everything. Sri Krishna has clearly articulated this. He says, “All living beings are similar to puppets in a puppet show; only it is the Ishvara, who is ruling and controlling them.

Lord Krishna, who clarifies on the confusion, again creates confusion in the same Gita. The One who has said that “I reside in all the things, and all the things reside within Me”, now says that “Nothing exists within Me; nor do I exist in anything”. Here, the philosophy that the Atma is beyond everything is highlighted.

Oh! Why are you confusing? Krishna answers in a categorical tone to this: “I am not plain to all, and I am cloaked by my Yoga Maya.”

Are you confused? Contemplate deep and you will get the clarity. Had Krishna said that “I will not be plain to anyone”, it will mean that “If there are 1,000 people, I will not be plain to all the 1,000 people”. On the contrary, when he says “I will not be plain to all”, this will mean that “Out of 1,000 people, I may not be plain to 999 people; however I would be plain to at least one person”. Krishna did not say that “I will not be understandable to anybody”. He said that “I will not be understandable to all”. By this, we can deduce that he is understandable to some.

Who are those “some”? They are the sages who are unaffected by the Yoga Maya. It may look contradictory when Krishna said that “Nothing exists within Me; nor do I exist in anything”. But it is these sages, who have elucidated the explanation and brought out clarity as follows:

“There is a flower garland lying on the pathway. It is half dark there; somebody who passes by that way stamps on the garland and gets terrified and shouts, “Oh! Snake! Snake!!” What looks like the garland and what looks like the snake is only one substance. Once he realises that it is only a garland, he also realises that it is not a snake. Therefore, what is the source for the visual form of the snake? Garland is the source.

Like by visualising the garland as a snake, ignorant people get caught into the illusion and visualise the absolute Brahmam as manifestation of many worlds. The source of this Cosmos is only this Brahmam alone.

What is the meaning when it is said “I am into this Cosmos; the Cosmos is within me.” It is the same like how it is visualised that the snake is inside the garland and the garland is in the snake. Both are true, isn’t it?

To the man who screamed that it was a snake, the snake had ‘swallowed’ the garland into it. In his perception, the snake appeared as the source. When his ignorance was erased and he realised that it was just a garland, the garland masked the snake within it. Now again the garland appears as the source.

The one who is caught by illusion looks at Cosmos as the absolute Brahmam. In reality, the source of Cosmos is only the Brahmam. To one, who disregards the presence of Cosmos with the aid of wisdom, only to him does Ishvara appear as everything and also as His own self. To the learned saint, other than Ishvara, Cosmos would not appear even as an image. When there does not exist something called Cosmos at all, then isn’t it absurd to say that it exists in Ishvara or the Ishvara exists in it? In the state of unawareness, there appear body, breath, mind, brain etc. Once awareness emanates, blissfulness also springs out and such a state emanates only after crossing all the earlier stages. That’s why Lord Krishna stands at the culminating end of wisdom and utters, “I don’t possess any substance; nor do I exist in any substance”. If some ignorant person has imagined a garland as a snake, does it mean that that the snake was really disguised inside the garland or the garland was really disguised inside the snake?

Kambar also states the same things in his Sundara Kandam in which he dwells on the same simile of garland and snake. He says that the imagination of the garland as a snake is a delusion. Similarly, all the five elements (Pancha Boothangal) appear to have united together to enlarge themselves as Cosmos. This is an illusion, which should fade away, and the garland, the Ishvara alone should be absorbed. It is Sri Ramachandra Murti, the Paramatma, who is the destructor of that illusion.

This article is a snippet from the Book Thus Spake the Divine, is available online at www.giri.in & across Giri Trading Agency Private Limited, A chain of Speciality Stores dealing in all kinds of products needed in Indian Culture & Tradition.