Class Notes by Bhargavi

In the 7th section of Shrimad Bhagavatam, when Hiranyaksha was killed by Bhagavan Varaha, his brother Hiranyakashyapu gets enraged and creates a retaliation rampage. He tells his family members that since Bhagavan Narayana is strengthened by yagna, they should go and destroy all the yagnas and stop anyone who is going to try to do yagnas. After the rampage begins, he calls his mother, his sister-in-law and all the kids and begins to share insights on life and death. One of the insights he shares is that all beings, including himself, his brother and all family members are particles of dust and these particles come and separate as life goes on. This is called “Asura Vedanta” where you talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. Asura Vedanta is when you treat others sorrow to be an illusion but you treat your own sorrow to be real. If he had meant what he was preaching, he wouldn’t have started that rampage. “Sura Vedanta” is where one gives reality to others sorrows but treat one’s own sorrow as an illusion. Hiranyakashyapu is engaged in wrong thinking which is shallow and there is no growth involved. We as students of Vedanta are trying to focus on deep, right thinking with a focus on growth.

Recap of verse 1: First verse of Drig Drishya Viveka highlights the shift from many to one. This verse reminds us of the first verse of Bhajagovindam. All the remaining verses revolve around this verse. It shows us the distinction between the Seer and the Seen, many objects and single pair of eyes. The eyes and its conditions in turn are noticed by the mind. The mind contains many thoughts and the observer that observes them in one. Another way to analyze this is shift our thinking from “manyness” (object) to “oneness” (subject). The purer we make our equipment, body, breath, mind, intellect, ego, the closer this becomes to the spirit. When the ego becomes extremely pure, devoid of deservership and doership. This pure ego is the observer. To present this more visually, we can imagine Bhagavan Rama’s body, which was made of light. His apparent matter was therefore much closer to the spirit.

Verse 2: The first line of this verse is bringing to our attention, how diversity is unimaginable. There are entities of varying colors, weights, heights, etc. On a tangible level, this line is encouraging us to be more appreciative of creation. We would show our appreciation by being in nature more and appreciate sights and sounds of nature and take better care of the environment. Analyzing this logically and objectively, if there is a creation, there has to be a creator. Appreciation towards the creation, helps us understand the fundamental (the creator). Creation is many but the creator is one. In Shrimad Bhagavad Gita, Chapter 10 focusses on the multiplicity, whereas in Chapter 11, the verses show that all of that is actually One.

There are lots of forms (objects) or seen (in the context of this text). The last quarter of the first verse had indicated that there is only the Seer and it is never seen. We have to burn this in our minds: “The seer is not the seen” Regardless, of the context, this law will never change. This can also be interpreted as: “the seen is not the seer” and “seer and seen cannot be the same at the same time”.

The nature of the Seer is awareness and nature of the seen is inertness. Even though we feel intellectually that there can be no relationship between the two, in actuality we don’t feel it. The main theme of this text is to show us that indeed they are both separate. Just like light and dark can have no relationship, one cannot exist in the presence of the other.

Even though there are many forms, the eyes that are seeing them are one set. The implication of this is that when one engages in Vichara, you don’t take any experience and relationship for granted. In every experience we have ever had, whether we remember it or not, there has been a trace of “Drik”, the seer. We have to question in every experience, where the seer is, in the object (articles, beings, circumstances) OR in me, the subject? In every experience, there is awareness, there is light. What is the source of this light?

We should not take for grated that this body is the spirit. Acharya Shankara is using spatial descriptions of objects but we can take this in a subtle field of likes and dislikes, love and hatred. We have to analyze if the emotion is of the nature or WE are of the nature of awareness.