Each Veda
consisted of 2 parts. The first 3/4th of the Veda is Karma Kanda
and the last 1/4th is the Gnana Kanda. Karma Kanda deals in detail
about the Mantras and the rituals to be performed. While the Gnana Kanda
deals with the description of the Supreme God known as the Para Brahman or
the Virat Purasha. Karma kanda has 2
divisions namely Samhita (Mantras) and Brahmanas (ritualistics). And Gnana
Kanda has 2 divisions namely Aranyakas (Contemplative) and Upanishads
(Highest philosophical thoughts). Each
of the 4 Vedas have its own Upanishads.
Upa nishati iti = Upanishad. This means “taking one nearer to
the Para Brahman. “अनन्य विद्यया ब्रह्मम् प्राप्यते ”“ananya vidyayaa brahmam praapyate” by
knowing this Upanishads, one is able to know the Brahman. Upanishads were said only in the Aranyakaas
(forests) and hence also known as Aranyaka.
The first sloka of Brahma sutra starts as … "अथातो
ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा" meaning, “then and thereafter he comes to
enquire about Brahman”. “when and
whereafter”? It is also said “Brahmano
nirveda” meaning only after completely practicing the Karma kaanda of the
Vedas “कर्म विचारं अनन्तरे”, and after getting fed up with the
rituals, one gets the desire to know the Brahman. जिज्ञासा = ज्ञातुमिच्छा. This subject matter
is known as “Mimamsa”. मीमांसा = पूज्यविषये विचार: Mimamsa is also known as the enquiry into the highest philosophical
thoughts.
isavasya
upanishad
At the end of every Veda we have Upanishads. Isavasya Upanishad is at the end of Shukla
Yajur Veda. There is a speciality about this Isavasya Upanishad. Normally
Upanishads are found only after the Aranyakas. But in this case Eashavasya
Upanishad is read along with the Samhita part of the Vedas which are usually
Mantras and rituals. The reason why it has been classified under the
Upanishads is that, it talks in detail about the Brahman.
Story part of the Upanishads :-
Normally an interesting story is always associated with the
Upanishads. Most of the Upanishads are in the form of "संवाद:"
meaning a conversation between
Guru and Sishya. Following is the
interesting story which led to the Eashavasya Upanishad.
We have already seen that Maharishi Veda Vyasa segregated the
Vedas into 4 and gave it to his Sishyas for propagation. Yajur Veda was given
to Maharishi Vysampayana. And
Vysampayana had many Sishyas namely Yaagnya valkya, his brother Balaka,
Bodhayana, Trishanku, Vykhanasa….etc.,
Vysampayanaa’s ashrama was on the outskirts of “Mithila” which was
ruled by King Janaka.
One day it so happened that Vysampayana had been invited to
attend a meeting (conference) of Maharishis in Meru parvatha. Due to some
unavoidable reasons or due to the deiva sankalpa he could not go and attend
this meeting and so he had sent his Sishya Trishanku.
On return Trishanku gave the message that all the other
Maharishis had come to the meet and his absence was seen as an arrogance by
Maharishis Viswamitra and Druvasa. Though Maharishi Vashishta supported
Vysampayana, Druvasa became angry and cursed Vysampayana for not coming to
the meet that he be afflcted with "ब्रह्महत्ति
दोषा" in seven days
time.Trishanku
also told him that he can get relief from the curse by performing the
Chaadraayana Homa. Since the person afflicted with dosha cannot perform the
homa, his Sishyaas have to perform it.
Vysampayana accepted it
with great sorrow, knowing fully well the he has to kill some one if he
should be afflicted with "ब्रह्महत्ति
दोषा".
In the mean
time it was Sishyaa Yaagnyavalkyaas turn to take the daily “mantraakshata
prasada” to King Janaka. On advice
from Vysampayana he took his little brother Balaka also with him to the
palace. On reaching the palace they
found that the king was not there in the throne. The little boy Balaka out of mischief
snatched the mantraakshata from Yaagnyavalkya, climbed up the throne and
placed it on the throne. Since it is a sin for ordinary people to climb the
throne a curse was uttered in an echo voice, that the one who climbed the
throne will be dead shortly.
When they
returned to the ashram, Vysampayana was very angry with Yaagnyavalkya. Balaka fell on Vysampayana’s feet and
begged pardon to say that it is his fault and by accident Vysampayana kicked
the boy. The boy fell down and died.
As per the curse he had killed the boy and he was afflicted with
Brahma hatti dosha. Yaagnyavalkya
retaliated his guru and said that he alone is qualified to perform the
Chaandraayana homa among his Sishyaas.
Guru Vysampayana got more angry and asked him to give back all the
Vedas taught to him and leave the ashrama. Yaagnyavalkya with his yogic
powers brought out all what he had learnt and threw the Vedas he had learnt
in the air. The other Sishyaas took
the form of Thithiri birds and swallowed the Vedas thrown in the air. The other Sishyaas performed the
Chaandraayana homa and relieved their Guru Vysampayana from the dosha.
Yaagnyavalkya
who walked out went straight to the Meru parvatha and did Tapas invoking the
Sun God. After several years of severe Tapas, Sun God appeared. Yaagnyavalkya
asked the Sun God to give him a Veda other than what he had returned to his
guru Vysampayana. The Sun god pleased
with his tapas, took the form of Hayagriva…. Man with horse head and gave him
the “Shukla Yajur Veda” This is also
known as the “Vaajasaneya Yajur Veda”
The one that
was given by Veda Vyasa to Vysampayana is known as the “Krishna Yajur
Veda”.
Yaagnyavalkya
after getting the “Shukla Yajur Veda” propagated it to his sishyaas Kaanva
and Tadhyan aatharvana. Tadhyan
aatharvana in turn gave it to his son and Sishya Subodha. At the end of Shukla
Yajur Veda is the Isvasya Upanishad.
So the Isvasya
Upanishad is a samvaada between Tadhyan aatharvana and Subodha.
Oum- the
complete whole: purnam-perfectly
complete: adah-that: purnam-perfectly complete: idam-this phenomenal world:
purnaat- from the all perfect: purnam-complete unit: udacyate-is produced:
purnasya-of the complete whole: purnam-complete all: aadaaya-having been
taken away: purnam-the complete balance: eva-even: avasisyate-is remaining.
The
personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely
perfect, all emanations from him, such as this phenomenal world, are
perfectly equipped as complete wholes.
Whatever is produced of the complete whole is also complete in
itself. Because he is the complete
whole, even though so many complete units emanate from him, he remains the
complete balance.
The concept of "Infinity" originated only from this Shanti mantra.
तेन त्यक्तेन भुञ्जीथा मा गृध: कस्य स्विद् धनम् || १
Isha-by the Lord: aavasyam-controlled: idam-this: sarvam-all: yat
kincha-whatever: jagatyaam-within the universe: jagat-all that is animate and
inanimate: tena-by Him: tyaktena-set apart quota: bhunjithaah-you should
accept: maa-do not: grdhah-endeavour to gain: kasya svit-of anyone else:
dhanam-the wealth.
Everything
animate or inanimate that is within the universe is controlled and owned by
the Lord. One should therefore accept
only those things necessary for himself, which are set aside as his quota,
and one should not accept other things, knowing well to whom they belong.
Kurvan-doing continuously: eva-thus: iha-during this span of life:
karmaani-work: jijeevishet-one should desire to live: satam-one hundred:
samaah-years: evam-so living: tvayi-unto you: na-no: anyatha-alternative:
itah-from this path: asti-there is: na-not: karma-work: lipyate-can be bound:
nare-unto a man.
One may aspire to live for hundreds of years if he continuously goes on
working in that way, for that sort of work will not bind him to the law of
karma. There is no alternative to this way for man.
Sloka 2 says that, having taken the Human life which is one of the highest, one can live up to 100 years.
But, he has to do his prescribed duties and that work must be performed with sacrifice, which will not bind him to the laws of Karma. There is absolutely no alternative to this....
In Bhagavad Gita Lord Krisha says... "Karmanyevadhikaraste, maa phaleshu kadaachana.... meaning to your prescribed duties and leave the results to me.....
sloka 2 says... one who kills atman will go to the world of devils covered with blinding darkness. But, in Bhagavad Gita Lord Krishna says Atma can never be destroyed....
But the Upanishads actually say that one who even thinks that his Atman will get destroyed will go to the world of Devils covered with blinding Darkness....
It is the Buddhist philosophy that believes in Shoonyavaada which says the Atma will go into nothingness .... And it is also some followers of Advaita philosophy who believe that once they realise Brahman the atman will lose its identity.... both are wrong ....
In reality we are all just a minuscule insignificant part of that Supreme Lord Brahman, devoid of the powers of Creation, Sustenance and annihilation.
Reference is from Ishavasya Upanishad - Mantra -12
अन्धं तम: प्रविशन्ति येSसंभूतिमुपासते |
ततो भूय इव ते तमो च उ संबूत्यागुं रता: || 12
andham tama: pravishanti ye asambhootimupaasate,
Tato bhooya iva te tamo cha vu sambhootyaagum rataa: - 12
Meaning -
Those who are engaged in the worship of Demigods enter into the darkest region of ignorance; and still more so do the worshippers of Impersonal Absolute.
The Sanskrit word sambhootim means "origin".
The Sanskrit words in this mantra, asambhootim refers to those who have no independent existence [DemiGods]; sambhootim refers to the Impersonal Absolute.
To answer the question above ....
In the original Sanskrit verse there is no mention of the words "Nirguna Brahman, Saguna Brahman or Hell"....
Only the words .... sambhootim, asambhootim, andam tama: .....
So in simple words it says....
Those who are engaged in the worship of Demigods ... like Indra, Varuna, Vayu: ....etc., enter into the darkest region of ignorance; and still more so do the worshippers of Impersonal Absolute formless Supreme Lord.
From Google search -
Yes, the statement "Nirguna Brahman is unmanifest & Saguna Brahman is manifest" is generally correct within the context of Advaita Vedanta and many Hindu philosophical traditions.
However, this distinction is more about perspective than it is about two separate entities. Both terms refer to the same Reality.
Here is a breakdown of the concepts:
1. Nirguna Brahman (Unmanifest/Attribute-less)
Definition:Nir (without) + Guna (qualities/attributes). It is the Absolute, formless, quality-less, and unchanging substrate of existence.
Unmanifest: Because it is beyond time, space, and causation, it cannot be perceived by the senses or fully grasped by the mind.
Nature: Pure Consciousness, Sat-Chit-Ananda (Existence-Knowledge-Bliss).
2. Saguna Brahman (Manifest/With Attributes)
Definition:Sa (with) + Guna (qualities/attributes). It is Brahman perceived through the lens of Maya (cosmic illusion/limitations).
Manifest: This is God with form (Ishvara or personal deities), which can be worshipped and contemplated.
Nature: Creator, sustainer, and destroyer of the universe. It is the formless Brahman "frozen" into form by devotion, similar to how water freezes into ice.
Key Nuances
It is ONE Brahman: Nirguna is not "lesser" or "more" than Saguna; they are two sides of the same coin.
Maya makes the difference: When Reality is viewed from a standpoint of absolute knowledge (Jnana), it is Nirguna. When viewed from within the world of duality (empirical, transactional reality), it appears as Saguna.
Purpose: Saguna Brahman is considered easier to worship for ordinary people (Bhakti), while Nirguna is the goal of meditation and knowledge (Jnana).
Conclusion: The statement is a correct description of the two aspects of the Divine as understood in Vedantic teaching, where the unmanifest (Nirguna) appears as the manifest (Saguna) to the human observer.
..............................
You are correct that focusing exclusively on Advaita Vedanta and the concept of Maya when explaining Brahman can narrow the scope of a subject that is interpreted in many ways across different Indian philosophical schools.
Here is a breakdown of why that perspective arises and why it may feel limiting:
Why Maya is Frequently Included: When discussing the absolute nature of Brahman (Nirguna Brahman—formless, non-dual), the philosophy of Advaita (as taught by Adi Shankaracharya) is the most prominent framework that utilizes the concept of Maya to explain how the One appears as many. In this view, Maya is the "power of illusion" that causes the non-dual Brahman to be perceived as the empirical world of multiplicity.
The "Dominant" Context: The assertion that Advaita is the "dominant" philosophy is largely a historical and academic one. From the 14th century onwards,, and later, through 19th-century Neo-Vedanta movements, Advaita has been presented by many as the supreme, or most "complete" understanding of the Upanishads.
Why It Can Be Misleading (The Other Schools): It is inaccurate to say Advaita represents the totality of Hindu thought. Other major Vedantic schools offer very different, equally important explanations of Brahman:
Vishishtadvaita (Ramanuja): Views the world and individual souls as real, constituting the "body" of Brahman (God), rather than an illusion.
Dvaita (Madhvacharya): A strictly dualistic view that insists on a fundamental, permanent difference between the individual soul and God (Brahman).
Bhakti Traditions: Many traditions focus on Saguna Brahman (God with attributes/form), where the world is not viewed as illusion (Maya) but as a real creation of the Divine, to be loved and worshipped.
Conclusion: While Advaita Vedanta is a significant and influential, often academically dominant, school of Indian philosophy, it is not the only one. A balanced explanation of Brahman should ideally recognize that other traditions (Vishishtadvaita, Dvaita) do not necessarily consider the world to be Maya (illusion) and view Brahman differently than the non-dualistic Advaita approach.
It is fair to say that using Advaita as the sole lens is a specific, rather than universal, perspective.
