Explaining Appearances

Vedāntic Maxims taken from the अपरोक्षानुभूति (Aparokṣānubhūti)

English Translation: Swami Vimuktananda, Swami Chinmayananda

Notes, Edits, Sandhi Decompounding: Thomas Felber, August 2020
contact@adishankaracharya.net

ABSTRACT
According to Advaita Vedānta, there is only one non-dual reality, changeless,
immortal. It is the highest truth, the noblest goal, but at the same time, it appears as
the greatest puzzle. How is it possible to recognize a sole existence among all
external and subjective differences we all universally perceive? Advaita Vedānta
often uses maxims [nyāyas] or teaching devices [upāyas] to help those who sincerely
seek to understand higher revelations, finally to recognize their essential nature
which is inseparable from highest reality or Brahman. A selection taken from a text
called Aparokṣānubhūti, attributed to Adi Shankaracharya should give a little insight.

Key Terms: Ātman, Adi Shankaracharya, Nyāya, Aparokṣānubhūti, Avidyā,

Avidyākalpita, Māyā, Nāmarūpe, Anirvacanīyakhyātivada, Upādhi, Bhagavad Gita
Bhāṣya, Brahma Sutra Bhāṣya, Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhāṣya, Adhyāropa
Apavāda, Swami Dayananda, Sri Sri Satchidānandendra Saraswati

I. Introduction

In Advaita Vedānta, particularly in the Upaniṣads (śruti) it happens quite often to read
conflicting statements which appear absurd at first sight, for example, “What speech
cannot reveal, but what reveals speech” (yadvācānabhyuditaṃ yena vāgabhyudyate
Kenopaniṣat 1.5). Hence for the sake of indicating the highest reality, the ancient lore
of seers (ṛṣis) used the traditional methodology of superimposition and negation
(adhyāropa apavāda).
Later teachers like Gauḍapadācārya and especially Adi Shankaracharya in his
commentaries (bhāṣya) distinguished between two standpoints, the empirical or
mundane viewpoint (vyayahārika dṛṣṭi) and the view of the absolute reality
(pāramārthika dṛṣṭi). It is essential to mention that these two perspectives do not
touch the non-dual reality. They both belong to the sphere of avidyā, as a dialectal
need until self-ignorance (avidyā) is dispelled by self-knowledge (Ātma-vidyā). As Sri
Sri Satchidānandendra Saraswati explained: “This distinction of absolute Reality and
Vyavahara from the standpoint of empirical life, should be unfailingly borne in mind in
order to reconcile the several seeming self-contradictory statements in Shankara-
Bhashya.”
II. Text

sarpa-tvena yathā rajjuḥ rajata-tvena śuktikā ।

vinirṇītāḥ vimūḍhena deha-tvena tathā-atma-tā

70. Just as a rope is imagined to be a snake and a nacre to be a piece of silver,

so too the ignorant (or deluded) wrongly understand the Ātman as the body.

Reflection: Two classic and popular Vedantic maxims to explain the falsity of a world
[Rajjusarpa Nyāya and Shuktirajata Nyāya].
These illustrations are sufficient to clarify the whole spectrum of appearances starting
from notions about God or Gods to subatomic particles, etc. They are basically all
names and forms, including colors (evolved and unevolved i.e. vyakrte / avyakrte
nāmarūpe).

The falsity of a world is never to be understood as non-existent, totally illusory, or

empty [śūnya]. Because that would contradict daily experiences.
The “falsity” is the wrong understanding of the sole reality i.e., Atman/Brahman as
“incorrectly viewed” [avidyākalpita], thereby interpreted as an infinitude of notions
which are superimposed upon Atman/Brahman due to ignorance [avidyā or mithya-
jnana]. Because of incorrect knowledge, all kinds of erroneous conclusions are
possible, like a rope is mistakenly viewed as a snake, and a nacre to be a piece
of silver.

Furthermore, the Anirvacanīyakhyātivada [objects are neither truly existent nor non-
existent, indeterminable] is accepted in Advaita Vedanta. But in Adi Shankara’s
terminology anirvacanīya is not a characteristic of a power called “Māyā,” as usually
taught by later Advaitins but applied to names and forms (vyakrte / avyakrte
nāmarūpe) as formulated in Brahma Sutra Bhāṣya 2.1.27:

avidyākalpitena ca nāmarūpalakṣaṇena rūpabhedena vyākṛtāvyākṛtātmakena

tattvānyatvābhyāmanirvacanīyena brahma pariṇāmādisarvavyavahārāspadatvaṃ
pratipadyate pāramārthikena ca rūpeṇa sarvavyavahārātītamapariṇatamavatiṣṭhate
“Brahman becomes subject to all kinds of (phenomenal) actions like transformation,
on account of the differences of aspects, constituted by name and form, which
remain either differentiated or non-differentiated, which cannot be determined either
as real or unreal, and which are imagined through ignorance. In Its real aspect
Brahman remains unchanged and beyond all phenomenal actions.”

According to Adi Shankara, the concept of Māyā clearly relates to names and forms
[nāmarūpe] conjured up by ignorance, mentioned in Brahma Sutra Bhāṣya 2.1.14:

sarvajñasyeśvarasyātmabhūte ivāvidyākalpite nāmarūpe

tattvānyatvābhyāmanirvacanīye saṃsāraprapañcabījabhūte sarvajñasyeśvarasya
māyāśaktiḥ prakṛtiriti ca śrutismṛtyorabhilapyete
“Name and form which constitute the seeds of the entire expanse of phenomenal
existence, and which are conjured up by nescience, are, as it were, non-different
from the omniscient God, and they are nondeterminable either as real or unreal, and
are mentioned in the Vedas and the Smrtis as the power, called Maya, of omniscient
God, or as prakrti (primordial Nature).”

ghaṭa-tvena yathā pṛthvī paṭatvena-eva tantavaḥ ।

vinirṇītāḥ vimūḍhena deha-tvena tathā-atma-tā॥ ॥ 71 ॥

71. Just as earth is thought of as a pot and threads are mistaken for cloth, so
too the ignorant (or deluded) wrongly understand the Ātman as the body.

kanakam kuṇḍala-tvena taraṅga-tvena vai jalam ।

vinirṇītāḥ vimūḍhena deha-tvena tathā-atma-tā॥ ॥ 72 ॥

72. Just as gold is thought of as gold-ring and water (itself) is mistaken for
waves, so too the ignorant (or deluded) wrongly understand the Ātman as the
body.

Reflection: Two other popular illustrations in Vedantic parlance, Kanakakundala

Nyāya and Samudrataranga Nyāya. As the rope-snake-illustration [Rajjusarpa
Nyāya] is universally applicable, the maxims of gold and gold-rings (or gold-
ornaments) and water-waves is especially helpful in explaining a lot of topics like
creation/ maintenance/dissolution [utpatti-sthiti-vilaya], cause-effect-relation [kārya-
kāraṇa-vada], concept of birth/death/transmigration [saṃsāravada], doctrine of
being an individual [jīvatva], doctrine of the five ‘sheaths’ [pañcakośa-viveka],
doctrine of the three states [avasthātraya-viveka], the apparent difference between
an individual and the Lord [jīva-īśvara-bheda] including all kinds of imagined
differences e.g. jīva-jīva-bheda, jīva-jaḍa-bheda, jīva-jaḍa-bheda, jaḍa-jaḍa-bheda,
as well as threefold distinctions of jñātā [knower-notion] -jñāna [knowledge] -jñeya
[objects of knowledge], bhoktṛtva [enjoyer-notion] -bhoga [enjoyment] -bhogya [object
of enjoying], kartṛtva [doer-notion] -kāraṇa-[instrument] -kriyā [action],
dṛk [seer] -dṛṣṭi [seeing] -dṛśya [seen]. Finally, the concepts of bandha [bondage]
and mokṣa/mukti [liberation] are figuratively explainable.
Not to ignore, to indicate the essential unity [aikātmya] amidst “apparent differences.”
To summarize:
All these mentioned concepts are nothing but names and forms, upādhis [limited
adjuncts, nāmarūpopādhy] superimposed upon Ātman/Brahman due to ignorance.

As Adi Shankara explained:

upādhīnāṃ ca avidyāpratyupasthāpitatvāt [Brahma Sutra Bhāṣya 3.2.15]
“the adjuncts themselves are conjured up by ignorance.”

puruṣa-tvena vai sthāṇuḥ-jala-tvena marīcikā ।

vinirṇītāḥ vimūḍhena deha-tvena tathā-atma-tā॥ ॥ 73 ॥

73. Just as the stump of a tree is mistaken for an individual person, and sand
of the desert is considered to be a mirage of water, so too the ignorant (or
deluded) wrongly understand the Ātman as the body.

gṛhatvena-eva kāṣṭhāni khaḍga-tvena-eva loha-tā ।

vinirṇītāḥ vimūḍhena deha-tvena tathā-atma-tā॥ ॥ 74 ॥

74. Just as a mass of wood is thought of as a house and iron as a sword, so

too the ignorant (or deluded) wrongly understand the Ātman as the body.

Note: ‘As a mass of wood or iron’, similarly to a mass of clay Swami Dayananda
said:
“When you say, 'Clay is,' the clay, depends upon another sat-buddhi, atoms. When
you say, 'The atom is,' the atom depends upon particles, which depend upon a
concept. When you say, 'A concept is,' the concept depends upon the witness of the
concept, sākṣī which is consciousness. And when you say, 'Consciousness is,' what
does it depend upon? It does not depend upon another consciousness because it is
svataḥsiddha, self-existent.”

yathā vṛkṣa-viparyāsaḥ jalāt-bhavati kasyacid ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 75 ॥

75. Just as one sees the illusion of a tree on account of water, so does a
person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the body.

potena gacchataḥ puṃsaḥ sarvam bhāti-iva cañcalam ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 76 ॥
76. Just as to a person going in a boat everything appears to be in motion, so
does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the body.

Note: Adi Shankara taught in Bhagavad Gita Bhāṣya 4.18:

na, akarma eva paramārthataḥ sat karmavat avabhāsate mūḍhadṛṣṭeḥ lokasya, tathā
karmaiva akarmavat
“Is it not that to an ordinary ignorant [foolish] observer, that which in reality is inaction
appears as action, and similarly, action itself as inaction?”

pīta-tvam hi yathā śubhre doṣāt-bhavati kasyacid ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 77 ॥

77. Just as to a person suffering from a defect (jaundice) white objects appear
as yellow, so does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the
body.

cakṣurbhyām bhrama-śīlābhyām sarvam bhāti bhrama-ātmakam ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 78 ॥

78. Just as to a person with defective eyes everything appears to be defective,

so does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the body.

Reflection: To whom does this Avidyā or ignorance belong?

That seems to be a colossal quarrel among Advaitins. The Vivaraṇa sub-school of

Advaita claims “ignorance” rests in and covers Ātman/Brahman, and the Bhāmatī
sub-school thinks “ignorance” rests in the Jiva. Both are wrong, Ātman/Brahman is
ekamevadvitiya, non-dual, without any second, and the “Jiva-notion” is itself
imagined due to ignorance (āvidyākalpitaṃ). Furthermore, ignorance is neither an
effect of Māyā because Māyā itself being conjured up by ignorance, according to Adi
Shankara [see Reflection, śloka 70]. Again, ignorance has neither its own nature
[bhāvarūpa], nor are there different forms like a plurality of ignorance, neither an
individual [Tula-avidyā] nor a total ignorance [Mula- avidyā].

Adi Shankara commented in Brahma Sutra Bhasyha 4.1.3:

kasya punarayam aprabodha iti cet, yastvaṃ pṛcchasi tasya te — iti vadāmaḥ

“To whom is this Ajnana (ignorance)?

In answer, ‘To you who is asking the question’, we say.”
To summarize: From the Absolute point of view [pāramārthika dṛṣṭi], as it were,
there was, is, never will be any ignorance! Only from the empirical
[vyayahārika/laukika dṛṣṭi] viewpoint, as long as one “assumes” to be bound, that
“ignorant-view” persist until self-knowledge (Ātma-vidyā) dispels it.

alātam bhramaṇena-eva vartulam bhāti sūrya-vat ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 79 ॥

79. Just as a firebrand, through mere rotation, appears circular like the sun, so
does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the body.

Note: Similar to Gaudapada’s Karika on the Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad IV. 49-50:

alāte spandamāne vai nābhāsā anyatobhuvaḥ |
na tato'nyatra niḥspandānnālātaṃ praviśanti te ||
na nirgatā alātātte dravyatvābhāvayogataḥ |
vijñāne'pi tathaiva syurābhāsasyāviśeṣataḥ ||

“When the firebrand is in motion, the appearances (that are seen in it) do not come
from elsewhere. When, the firebrand is not moved, the appearances do not go
elsewhere from the motionless firebrand. Further, the appearances, when the
firebrand is not moved, do not enter into the firebrand itself. The appearances do not
emerge from the firebrand because they are not of the nature of a substance. This
also applies to Consciousness on account of the similarity of appearances (in both
cases).”

mahat-tve sarva-vastūnām-aṇu-tvam hi-ati-dūrataḥ ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 80 ॥

80. Just as all things that are large appear to be exceedingly small owing to
great distance, so does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as
the body.

सूक्ष्मत्वे सवववस्िूनाां स्थूलत्वां चोपनेत्रिः ।

िद्वदात्मतन दे हत्वां पश्यत्यज्ञानयोगिः ॥ ८१॥
sūkṣma-tve sarva-vastūnām sthūla-tvam ca-upanetrataḥ ।
tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 81 ॥

81. Just as all objects that are exceedingly small (or subtle) appear to be large
when viewed through lenses, so does a person due to ignorance wrongly
interprets Ātman as the body.
kāca-bhūmau jala-tvam vā jala-bhūmau hi kācatā ।
tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 82 ॥

82. Just as a surface of glass is mistaken for water, and often a spread of water
is mistaken for a sheet of glass, so does a person due to ignorance wrongly
interprets Ātman as the body.

yadvat-agnau maṇi-tvam hi maṇau vā vahni-tā pumān ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 83 ॥

83. Just as a person imagines a jewel in fire and a bright jewel as a glowing
cinder so does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the
body.

abhreṣu satsu dhāvatsu dhāvan-iva yathā śaśī ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 84 ॥

84. Just as when clouds move, the moon appears to be in motion, so does a
person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the body.

yathā-eva diś-viparyāsaḥ mohāt-bhavati kasyacid ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 85 ॥

85. Just as a person through confusion loses all distinction between the
different points of the compass, so does a person due to ignorance wrongly
interprets Ātman as the body.

Note: Therefore, the best medicine to cure a ‘confused mind’ is the correct
knowledge/understanding. As Adi Shankara taught:

parasyāduḥkhitve 'nyasya ca duḥkhino 'bhāve duḥkhopaśamanāya

śāstrārambhānarthakyamiti cet? na, avidyādhyāropitaduḥkhitvabhramāpohārthatvāt,
ātmani prakṛtasaṅkhyāpūraṇabhramāpohavat kalpitaduḥkhyātmābhyupagamācca
Objection: If the Supreme Self has no misery, and there is no other entity to be
miserable, then it is useless for the scriptures to try to remove misery.
Reply: Not so, for they are meant to remove the false notion of misery superimposed
by ignorance. And the Self being admitted imagining Itself as miserable, the
scriptures help to remove that error, as in the case of the failure to count the tenth
man, although he was there.
[Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhāṣya 1.4.7]

yathā śaśī jale bhāti cañcala-tvena kasyacid ।

tadvat-ātmani deha-tvam paśyati-ajñāna-yogataḥ ॥ 86 ॥

86. Just as the moon (when reflected) in water appears to one as unsteady, so
does a person due to ignorance wrongly interprets Ātman as the body.

evam-ātmani-avidyātaḥ deha-adhyāsaḥ hi jāyate ।

saḥ eva-ātma-parijñānāt-līyate ca para-ātmani ॥ 87 ॥

87. Thus when the Self is wrongly recognized, the idea of having a body (e.g.
being a doer, enjoyer etc.) persist, when the Self is truly recognized, everything
dissolves into the Highest (i.e. being recognized as the Parātman/Brahman
without a second).

Note: sarvaṃ khalvidaṃ brahma. “All this is Ātman/Brahman” [Chāndogya Upaniṣad

3.14.1]

III. Conclusion

One might ask why appearances exist? They do not really exist or, from the empirical
viewpoint, only appear to exist. Another beautiful statement:
"One might define human consciousness as the possibility of attending/intending and
describe specific experiences and their interpretations as possibilities for
consciousness as attentions and intentions. Experiencing is a synthesis of an "of"
and "for" - Alternatively, from the position of Shankara and Advaita-Vedanta: the
possibility of superimposing and the possibilities for superimposition.”
(Consciousness and Science: an Advaita-Vedantic Perspective on the Theology –
Science Dialogue, Bharath Sriraman, Walter Benesch)

(Conscious) possibilities seem to be natural, hence according to Advaita Siddhānta,

pure or unconditional consciousness, i.e., Ātman/Brahman as the only limitless
existence neither set a limit nor is tainted by apparent possibilities.
OM TAT SAT

Bibliography:
Adi Shankara’s Bhashya. https://advaitasharada.sringeri.net
Bharath Sriraman, Walter Benesch. Consciousness and Science: an Advaita-
Vedantic Perspective on the Theology – Science Dialogue
Sri Sri Satchidanandendra Saraswati. Misconceptions About Śaṅkara
Swami Chinmayananda. Aparokshanubhuti: Intimate Experience of the Reality
Swami Nikhilananda. Mandukya Upanishad With Gaudapada's Karika and
Shankara's Commentary
Swami Vimuktananda. Aparokshanubhuti Or Self Realization