Atheists, Buddhists and Human Incarnation

[dattaswami]

Atheists, Buddhists and Human Incarnation

 

If God is introduced through the medium of human body, atheists will not agree. Hence Shankara ( a human incarnation of God) selected the pure awareness (soul) as the medium of God for introduction. Even in the human incarnation, the pure awareness (soul) acts as a medium charged by God. Let us isolate that part of soul only from the human incarnation and all this isolation is only an assumption. In general, the pure awareness alone can act as the medium of God, since basically there is no objection for any item of the creation to act as medium for God. The medium charged by God can be treated as God like the metallic wire charged by current. In this way you can call the assumed pure awareness or soul charged by God in the human incarnation as God.

 

But a soul without God exists in every human being and Shankara called every soul as God due to the possibility of a soul to be charged by God and due to the existence of the soul charged by God in human incarnation. What is the use of all this? The atheists are mainly characterized by ego and will not accept God other than themselves. This rigid psychology of the atheist cannot be condemned in the beginning. The preacher must follow the psychology of a rigid ignorant student and should slowly uplift him. Hence, there is no other way to uplift the atheists existing in the time of Shankara (Budhhists and purva mimasakas).

 

Shankara told that the soul in every human being is God and this satisfies the rigid psychology of the atheists. At least they have accepted the existence of God as the existence of themselves. Buddhists were in a very pitiable condition since they were thinking that everything including themselves is nothing (shunya). Shankara brought them up by stating that there should be the soul to experience the nothing. Otherwise, when nothing is not experienced, nothing cannot be established.

 

The Buddhists came up and accepted the existence of the soul that experiences nothing (the school of prajnavada of Dignaga). Since that soul is God, they have accepted the existence of God. But they were rigid of nothing except the soul and therefore Shankara had to follow their rigid psychology of nothing except the soul. Hence Shankara told that the soul is truth and God and except the soul or God everything (world) is nothing. (Brahma satyam….). The ego of the atheist was also satisfied because the soul itself is the supreme God.

 

The purva mimasakas were already accepting the existence of soul and world. Now there is a contradiction between Buddhists and purva mimasakas in the existence of the world though not in the existence of soul. To convince both these rigid and ignorant students, Shankara told that the world is neither existent nor non-existent (mithya). A negligible trace can be treated almost as non-existent and is existent in the strict sense. Since the world is a negligible dream of the soul, it is existent as well as non-existent. Thus he combined both in the concept of the world and made them accept the existence of God as a soul. The purva mimasakas were interested in achieving the happiness in heaven by doing rituals.

 

Shankara exploited their ambition for happiness and stated that the God or soul is infinite happiness (ananda). This attracted the purva mimasakas to concentrate on God than on heaven. But in practical experience all of them found the absence of the experience of the natural infinite happiness and this raised the doubt whether the soul is actually God in its original state.

 

Shankara had to drag these atheists further; otherwise, they will go back to their original atheism. Then Shankara applied another trick by stating that the ignorance of soul must be removed practically due to its long-standing effect. This long-standing influence of ignorance is called as vikshepa. Even if you awake from the dream and realize that the tiger in the dream was unreal, its effect like vibration and fear will not cease immediately. The theoretically realization removes only the apparent layer of ignorance called as avaranam. For this removal of practical effect of ignorance, Shankara suggested about the meditation of a completely liberated soul called as Eshwara, who is just a leader of the same class. Both the soul and the Eshwara are essentially the students of the same class but Eshwara, is a more meritorious student whose help can be taken by the soul. The atheist is trapped here because basically there is no difference between himself and the Eshwara.

 

He thought that there is nothing wrong to take the help of a meritorious student of the same class so that the less meritorious student can become the same meritorious student on one day or the other. Shankara maintained the essential equality of Eshwara and the individual soul as Brahman to satisfy the continuing ego of the atheist. The atheists started meditating upon the Eshwara. See the wonderful talent of Shankara who made the atheist not only to accept God but also meditate upon God! That is the talent of the Satguru when God comes in human form. Nobody can handle this situation except God. The technique used by Shankara was in the line of Vedic tradition only.

 

Veda is also attracting the theists by projecting God as the source of materialistic benefits here as well as in the heaven. The worship of God is introduced through this attraction (kamya karma). Slowly the theist tastes the nature of God and gets attracted to God leaving the other attractions. Shankara has extended the same to the atheists also. If you take the path of Shankara as the absolute truth, you must have been an atheist like Buddhist or purva mimasaka. You are a grown up student going to college and should not aspire for the chocolates given to kids to go to school.

 

Shankara was correct in that time for those atheists since the final result was in their eternal welfare only. A psychological trick with good application for the benefit is always appreciable because ends justify means. You should take Shankara as the Guru with affection on ignorant students and not as a mere scholar who just reveals the absolute truth and goes away without bothering about the practical uplift of the students.

 

 

 

At the Lotus Feet of His Holiness Sri Dattaswami

 

Anil Antony

 

www.universal-spirituality.org

Universal Spirituality for World Peace

antonyanil@universal-spirituality.org

[Soldier of God]

There are many paths to enlightenment. As a Christian I believe the path of Christ's wisdom is the best to understanding God.

[dattaswami]

There are many paths to enlightenment. As a Christian I believe the path of Christ's wisdom is the best to understanding God.

 

 

Jesus preached wonderful knowledge. The ordinary fishermen were convinced and followed Him as the Lord. The priests of church were great saints who were unmarried and left every thing for the sake of God. Those priests were certainly higher then ordinary people. The ordinary people followed Jesus because they were convinced in their minds, intelligence and consciousness. They clarified their doubts with Jesus directly and were convinced. This is called as Atma Pramanam. These ordinary people did not look for the voting of the priests to Jesus. In fact, the priests opposed Jesus and crucified Him. In spite, of that the ordinary people followed Jesus since they were convinced. A priest has left every thing for the sake of God. No doubt they are greater people since they have greater urge. The greater urge itself cannot qualify any person. A student may have a greater urge for the answer but he might have not understood the answer given by the teacher. Another student might have not so much urge but has understood the answer. Between these two students who is greater?

 

Janaka was a king and did not leave the kingdom. Suka was a saint and left every thing with extreme urge for God. Janaka was appointed as examiner of Suka by sage Vyasa. Who is greater between these two? Though Janaka was a house holder and did not leave anything, he is the student with answer. Suka is a saint who left every thing and got answer from Janaka only. Quest is appreciable but cannot be the qualification. Capacity to understand the answer lies with the internal mental development (Samskara). The external orange robe, the quest for God, leaving every thing and roaming every where, attaining a post of Pithadhipati, studying scriptures by tradition etc., are certainly appreciable but are not the qualifications of greatness. A student may be in the uniform dress. He may have lot of urge to get the knowledge. He might have left his house and roamed from school to school. He might have become a teacher of a school. He might have studied the course according to discipline. He might have memorized and got through the examination and He might have thus got the degree and became the teacher. But still his doubts in the subject were not answered. Einstein and Ramanujam did not get a pass and could not get the degree. But they have perfectly understood the subject. Therefore, attainment lies in their internal samskaras and attaining the real preacher.

 

Both the samskaras and Guru (Preacher) are important for the attainment and not the other points. Both the pearl shell and the rain drop are essential for the formation of a pearl. Except these two, all the other factors are ephemeral only. You should judge anything by your self and in association with others through discussions and debates. In coming to the conclusion you can take the help of the discussions with others. But you should use your own intelligence and consciousness in final conclusion. In this way the participation of others is helpful. But to see whether some body lifted his hand or not for voting is a point is foolishness. You can discuss with him about the point. You should lift your hand based on your final conclusion. Even a cleaver person may go wrong in that particular point. Your vote should not depend on his vote.