1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Secret behind Neither Sat nor aSat

Discussion in 'Hinduism - Philosophy and Theology DIR' started by ameyAtmA, Jan 26, 2022.

  1. ameyAtmA

    ameyAtmA ~ ~
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    779
    Ratings:
    +750
    Religion:
    VAsudev-KRshNa's disciple ; Open Hindu
    Namaste

    First, Bhagavad Geeta
    BG 13.13 ज्ञेयं यत्तत्प्रवक्ष्यामि यज्ज्ञात्वामृतमश्रुते |
    अनादिमत्परं ब्रह्म न सत्तन्नासदुच्यते || 13||

    I shall now reveal to you that which ought to be known, knowing which leads to immortality.
    It is beginningless (anAdi) Brahman (vastness) , which can be called neither Sat nor aSat.

    Here, people take Sat = existence and aSat = non-existence and call this the great paradox.
    It need not be so.

    In this context, Sat = that which eternally IS =
    avyakta mooLa prakRuti . The Potential , invisible (avyakta) , root PrakRuti-cause, fits the definition of Sat as eternal and unchanging.
    By law of thermodynamics too, this avyakta mooLa conserves itself and always IS. Always exists.
    KRshNa calls this parA prakrUti (higher prakrUti)


    aSat = the manifestation of this avyakta mooLa into physical, concrete or stages prior to that. This fits definition of aSat because it is constantly changing, transforming and never still. What is one day stops being in that form and has become something else. A tree is there and then not there, hence this is aSat. KRshNa calls it the lower prakrUti (aparA prakruti).


    Now...Brahman is the substratum of and beyond both parA and aparA i.e. beyond Sat and aSat.

    This is how Brahman is neither Sat not aSat! Simple ?

    Elsewhere , BG 7 ans 15 both refer to this as
    aparA prakruti
    para prakruti
    ME - I am beyond these and all beings are MY parA prakruti , as if pearls of thread strung on (taking shelter of) the same thread that is ME ,

    BG 15.16 - द्वाविमौ पुरुषौ लोके क्षरश्चाक्षर एव च |
    क्षर: सर्वाणि भूतानि कूटस्थोऽक्षर उच्यते || 16||

    dvAu imau purushe loke ksharshchAkshara eva cha |
    kshara sarvANi bhUtAni kUTastho-akshara eva cha ||

    BG 15.17 उत्तम: पुरुषस्त्वन्य: परमात्मेत्युदाहृत: |
    यो लोकत्रयमाविश्य बिभर्त्यव्यय ईश्वर: || 17||

    uttam purushastvanyah: paramAtmetyudAhRutah: |
    yo lokatrayamAvishya bubhartyavyaya Ishvarah: ||

    ---
    There are 2 kinds of entities in this world -

    (i) perishable (bodies and non-living) and
    (ii) imperishable (jeevas)

    (iii) There is a 3rd -- Purushottam , Highest Being, ME, ParamAtmA, Ishvar, that is beyond and transcends these two.

    Same thing is revisited from BG 7 to BG 15 Purushottam Yog, and the same is iterated in BG 13.13 as

    Purushottam ParamAtmA Brahman = neither, beyond and transcends both

    (i)sentient jeevAtmA made of avyakta mooLa prakruti which exists eternally = Sat
    (ii) perishable manifested forms of matter-energy that is ever changing fleeting, transforming, kshaNabhangur = aSat.

    This is how Brahman ParamAtmA Ishwar BhagavAn is neither sat nor aSat.

    he nAtha nArAyaNa vAsudeva
    namah: shivAya
     
    #1 ameyAtmA, Jan 26, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
  2. ameyAtmA

    ameyAtmA ~ ~
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    779
    Ratings:
    +750
    Religion:
    VAsudev-KRshNa's disciple ; Open Hindu
    ...Further, this camaradie between sat and asat spoken of in the famous nAsadiya sUkta of Rg Veda is saying the same thing?

    Relation of sat with asat means relation of mULa prakRuti with its manifestation i sattva raja tama.

    नासदासीन्नो सदासीत्तदानीं नासीद्रजो नो व्योमा परो यत् |

    किमावरीवः कुह कस्य शर्मन्नम्भः किमासीद्गहनं गभीरम् ॥ १॥


    1. Then the avyakta mULa had not shown any signs of its presence (sat) ,
    nor had the unreal mAyic ever-changing mortal prakruti which is manifestation of the avyakta, there (asat),
    (my translation)


    There was no air then, nor the space beyond it.
    What covered it? Where was it? In whose keeping?
    Was there then cosmic fluid, in depths unfathomed?


    So what was at that point was just Brahman, paramAtmA.
     
    #2 ameyAtmA, Jan 26, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2022
    • Like Like x 1
  3. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    29,471
    Ratings:
    +13,635
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    Avyakta, not Asat.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. ameyAtmA

    ameyAtmA ~ ~
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    779
    Ratings:
    +750
    Religion:
    VAsudev-KRshNa's disciple ; Open Hindu
    Please explain?
    I am calling Sat = avyakta mooLa prakRuti
    and aSat = manifested world = aparA prakruti made of pancha mahabhutas
     
  5. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    29,471
    Ratings:
    +13,635
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    I am not a learned person. I am just a common Joe and an atheist. So, I say that in simple English, unperceived but not non-existent.
     
  6. ameyAtmA

    ameyAtmA ~ ~
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    779
    Ratings:
    +750
    Religion:
    VAsudev-KRshNa's disciple ; Open Hindu
    Got it. Yes, exactly.
     
  7. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    29,471
    Ratings:
    +13,635
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    That is 'Nasadiya'.
     
  8. Martin

    Martin Spam, wonderful spam (bloody vikings!)

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2017
    Messages:
    3,792
    Ratings:
    +2,890
    Religion:
    Dharmic
    If Brahman isn't sat, how does this fit with "sat-chit-ananda"?
     
  9. ameyAtmA

    ameyAtmA ~ ~
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    779
    Ratings:
    +750
    Religion:
    VAsudev-KRshNa's disciple ; Open Hindu
    Hi Martin

    A very valid question.

    In the context of BG 13.13 anAdimatparambrahman nasadAsditi uchyate
    here, the point is that Brahman transcends that avyakta akshara mooLa which does fall into the Sat category because of its eternal existence.

    Avyakta (unmanifested unseen) akshara (imperishable)
    So although imperishable and eternally existing, the avyakta akshara is still a derivation of Brahman despite qualifying for the title of Sat. Eternally True.

    aSat is easy -- things that get destroyed, but aSat also means untruth , see BG 17.


    ---
    Coming back to the original sat as in Sat-Chit-ananda -- is explained in chapter 17

    BG 17.23 ॐ तत्सदिति निर्देशो ब्रह्मणस्त्रिविध: स्मृत: |
    ब्राह्मणास्तेन वेदाश्च यज्ञाश्च विहिता: पुरा || 23||

    oṁ tat sad iti nirdeśho brahmaṇas tri-vidhaḥ smṛitaḥ
    brāhmaṇās tena vedāśh cha yajñāśh cha vihitāḥ purā

    The words “Om Tat Sat” have been declared as symbolic representations of the Supreme Absolute Truth [of Brahman], from the beginning of creation. From them came the priests, scriptures, and sacrifice.

    BG 17.26-27
    सद्भावे साधुभावे च सदित्येतत्प्रयुज्यते |
    प्रशस्ते कर्मणि तथा सच्छब्द: पार्थ युज्यते || 26||
    यज्ञे तपसि दाने च स्थिति: सदिति चोच्यते |
    कर्म चैव तदर्थीयं सदित्येवाभिधीयते || 27||

    sad-bhAve sAdhu-bhAve cha sad ity etat prayujyate
    prashaste karmaNi tathA sach-chhabdaH: pArtha yujyate
    yajd`ne tapasi dAne cha sthitiH: sad iti chochyate
    karma chaiva tad-arthIyaM sad ity evAbhidhIyate

    The word “Sat” means eternal existence (sad-bhAva) and goodness (sAdhu-bhAva, saintly). O Arjun, it is also used to describe an auspicious action. Being established in the performance of sacrifice, penance, and charity, is also described by the word “Sat.” And so any act for such purposes is named “Sat.”

    Whereas,
    BG 17.28
    अश्रद्धया हुतं दत्तं तपस्तप्तं कृतं च यत् |
    असदित्युच्यते पार्थ न च तत्प्रेत्य नो इह || 28||


    aśhraddhayā hutaṁ dattaṁ tapas taptaṁ kṛitaṁ cha yat
    asad ity uchyate pārtha na cha tat pretya no iha

    O son of Pritha, whatever acts of sacrifice(yadnya - ahutam), charity (dattam) or penance (tapas) are done without faith (shraddhA) , are termed as “Asat.” They are useless both in this world and the next.

    *here faith means doing something meaningfully from within your heart , not faith as in world religions.
    --
    SacchidAnanda rUpAya vishwatpathyAdi hetave |
    tApatraya vinAshAya Shri KRshNAya vayam numah: ||

    - Bhagvat mahAtmya verse 1

    Obeissances and salutations to Shri KRshNa who is the embodiment of Truth, consciousness and [param]Ananda, who is the shelter and Lord (pati) of and the original (Adi) cause (hetave) of the whole world/universe/existence (by whose 'hetu' - purpose, intention, the world came into being) , who destroys the threefold miseries.


    Here, embodiment of Truth implies all actions as well. Whatever He did and does were and are based on dharma alone and always auspicious - mangal, meaningful, and beneficial. Hence the intentions and actions were always backed by Truth. Sat.
     
    #9 ameyAtmA, Jan 27, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2022
  10. Viswa

    Viswa Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2022
    Messages:
    206
    Ratings:
    +76
    Religion:
    Hindu
    I will share here about that.

    Nothing came from Nirguna Brahman. But Maya, a potential of that, brought the Avyakta as Prakriti, and with the three gunas joined, Nirguna Brahman looks like Saguna Brahman, and so "Om Tat Sat" is said as "beginning/cause of creation".

    But, Nirguna Brahman, that is without gunas, stands separate from Maya, is neither cause nor effect, nothing came from it, and it is not the beginning of anything.

    "Sat-Chit-Ananda", "Om Tat Sat", "Witness-Consciousness", all represents "Saguna Brahman", that is Brahman standing with Maya/Gunas, like Shiva with Sakthi.

    When Shiva is taken solely without Sakthi, it cannot be said anything as 'beginning/cause/effect/existence/non-existence/etc.. - na it na iti'. But, when Shiva combined with Sakthi, become cause for primordial egg, and you know what happened. Wherever "Sat" is represented, it points to that "Shiva-cum-Sakthi" "Saguna Brahman" "Brahman cum Maya" "Om Tat Sat", as Existence, it is the first existence in creation, like causal body, from which everything came. The "Linga form", where top is Shiva and below is Sakthi, and combindly becomes cause for creation. Also, like Narayana reclining in Anantasesha (His infinite forms), becomes cause for creation. But, how Sakthi combined with Shiva - Brahman combined with it's potential - Top portion of Linga combined with bottom portion - Narayana combined with Ananthasesha, is always a Mystery..

    One, can keep on meditating on the "Causal Body" in any form said above, can reach that "Existence" and attain Liberation (no birth again in this world).
     
    #10 Viswa, Jan 27, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2022
  11. Aupmanyav

    Aupmanyav Be your own guru

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    Messages:
    29,471
    Ratings:
    +13,635
    Religion:
    Atheist, Advaita (Non-duality), Orthodox Hindu
    That is why they call it indescribable. He is sat as well as asat (which situation is beyond human comprehension other than for the enlightened - like me). :D
    Fom sat to asat (and vice-versa), it is Quantum Mechanics.
     
    #11 Aupmanyav, Jan 28, 2022
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2022
  12. ameyAtmA

    ameyAtmA ~ ~
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2013
    Messages:
    779
    Ratings:
    +750
    Religion:
    VAsudev-KRshNa's disciple ; Open Hindu
    Of course if "sarvaM khalvidam Brahman" mahAvAkya holds,
    from that angle Brahman is both Sat and aSat.
    Inclusive.
    Kaleidoscopic.

    Hence what matters is the context of what we are focusing on,
    BG 13.13 is focusing on the sarva kAraNa kAraNaM - cause of all causes. Hence it sifts out Brahman standing apart from its own Sat and aSat.

    It is easy to mistake this as a timeline as first then next, but we know that is not the case.

    That very same 13th chapter moves on to say I am "jyotishAM jyoti" light of all lights, and I have figurative hands eyes everywhere,
    and moves on to say it is indivisible and is
    bhUtabhartRu - it nurtures
    grAsishNu - it destroys
    prabhavishNu - it brings forth, manifests

    It never says "my SaguNa counterpart does these things"

    If you notice the original upanishads and Geeta never use the words SaguNa and NirguNa Brahman. It is the whole.

    Even in the Geeta KRshNa says "daivi hyeshA guNamayI mama mAyA duratyayA"
    mama mAyA -- MY divine mAyA is hard to cross (unless you take My shelter). So He acknowledges the possessive noun My.

    What will free the bound jeeva to realize they are IT (or whatever else), is a separate topic and again subjective.

    Then again there is an RF member here who says NirguN Brahman is Love and certainly not achintya. You can take it up with them.
     
  13. Viswa

    Viswa Member

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2022
    Messages:
    206
    Ratings:
    +76
    Religion:
    Hindu
    Superb sir.

    "It is his counterpart - Saguna Brahman does this - becomes cause, etc.." I never said Saguna is his counterpart. Saguna Brahman is also Him, nirguna, but along with his potential Maya.

    You cannot perceive him without his Maya. He cannot become cause or Causal body without Maya.

    Ofcourse, he has hands and legs and head everywhere. Ofcourse, he is light of all lights. I never said it is not he. It is only him, there is no second other than him as Saguna. But all this, light of all lights, hands, legs, etc.. "He along with His potential" is possible. He, without his potential or without three gunas, without Avyakta, not at all possible. Not at all means, if his powers/forms/potential/three gunas/Avyakta are separated from him, he cannot be said anything as "cause/effect/existence/non-existence/etc..". The causal body, is all a combination of "He and His potential/powers/three gunas/Infinite forms", "Brahman with Maya", "Shiva with Sakthi", and only then creation can be caused, but only "Him/Brahman/Shiva" without "Three gunas/Sakthi/Three gunas/potential" means Nothing can be said/done.

    He too says in that chapter afterwards that, experience can happen ONLY in combination of "Purusha and Prakriti", where Purusha is the experiencer and Prakriti is experienced, right??
     
Loading...