Adhyāropa-Apavāda[1]
When we have to explain a completely unknown entity to someone, we first try to describe a thing he is familiar with, and at least partially resembles the entity in question. Once the familiar thing is described, we show the differences between the intermediate thing from the original entity we set out to describe. This method of teaching is called adhyāropa-apavāda. Adhyāropa is to superimpose on an object certain characteristics that are not its own; apavāda (does not mean complaint in this context) is to remove the misconceptions.
Suppose a child asks — “What is ghee?”. The mother shows the box of dalda[2]. This is adhyāropa. She imputes ghee-ness to something that looks like ghee but is really not ghee. The child believes that dalda itself is ghee, and remembers what he heard that ghee is good for health. Then she explains that the dalda-ghee that she showed just has fat, colour, texture, and solidifying properties like ghee, but it is not the same as cow’s ghee. This is apavāda. Once the child brings this rescinscion — or apavāda to his mind, his knowledge of ghee becomes good enough to recognise it. At some point in the future, if he happens to acquire ghee, if he eats and experiences its taste, his knowledge of ghee will be complete. Thus, old information becomes the foundation for new learning. Past experience paves the path to future experiences.
This is the teaching method of the Vedas and Vedanta. Parabrahma does not have any form or any activity. Our words cannot describe it. If we are to become familiar with it, we should use some things of which we have knowledge as the means toward understanding it. This is the process of adhyāropa. This process has existed in our philosophical literature even before Śaṅkarācārya’s time.
Let us say that a great man from Punganur has heard of the famous Gokhale Institute and arrives at Bengaluru to visit it. As soon as he gets off the train, he asks where Gokhale Institute is. Someone directs him to Basavanagudi. This is adhyāropa. When he comes to Gandhi Bazaar and asks around, he finds that Gokhale Institute is not there. This is apavāda. The people at Gandhi Bazaar direct him to the Bull temple. This is again adhyāropa. When he visits the temple, he finds that the institute is not there either. The people at the temple direct him further down the road. This is not adhyāropa, because if he walks down from the Bull temple, Gokhale institute will be visible right in front of him. This is sākṣātkāra.
A child wants to see the moon. Is it possible to search the entire sky for it? No. Therefore, the elder carrying the child points at the branch of a tree and asks it to look in that direction. The orb of the moon will be visible in the direction of the branch. Therefore, something that seemed far now seems to be near. This example is called śākhā-candra-nyāya. This is adhyāropa-apavāda.
There is a tradition of showing the star Arundhatī to newlyweds on the evening of their wedding day. Arundhatī is the epitome of pativratā-dharma (the dharma of loyalty to her husband). But it is a very small star and not easily visible. Therefore there is a tactic to spot it. The purohitas first ask the newlyweds to turn towards the north. This is adhyāropa. The north is not Arundhatī. Therefore there is an apavāda for that. Then the saptarṣi-maṇḍala[3] is shown. This is also an adhyāropa; the saptarṣi-maṇḍala is not the Arundhatī; then the purohitas show the Vasiṣṭha star. This is again an adhyāropa, because Vasiṣṭha is not Arundhatī; Arundhatī is Vasiṣṭha’s wife. Therefore another apavāda is required. In the end, the purohitas point towards the tiny star next to Vasiṣṭha. This is how Arundhatī is spotted. This is also a famous example called the Arundhatī-pradarśana-nyāya. This is adhyāropa-apavāda.
The Taittiriyopaniṣat has Bhṛgu Maharṣi’s story. Bhṛgu went to Varuna and requested him to teach him about Brahma. Varuna instructed him thus — “annaṃ brahmeti vyajānāt” — “Consider anna (food that you know very well) as Brahma”. This is an adhyāropa. Bhṛgu thought about and critically examined this instruction. Food nourishes and sustains the body. He realised then that it was not Brahma. Thus, there was an apavāda for the instruction. He again went to Varuṇa and requested him to instruct him further. Varuṇa said “prāṇo brahmeti vyajānāt” — “Consider prāṇa as Brahma”. This is again adhyāropa. Because, Bhṛgu went back and deliberated about it and realized that prāṇa — which is none other than breath or air — is not Brahma. He went back to Varuṇa. Now he was told “mano brahma” — “the manas is Brahma”. From his experience and examination, Bhṛgu realized that this was again an adhyāropa and it had to be rescinded. He prayed to Varuṇa again for instruction. Again, there was an adhyāropa of “vijñānaṃ brahma” — “Vijñāna is Brahma” and that was rescinded too. Because of this experience and critical examination, Bhṛgu became eligible for the highest upadeśa. Then he received the upadeśa : “Ānando brahma … saiṣā parame vyoman pratiṣṭhitā” — “Ānanda is Brahma. It is present in the highest sky”.
This theory was testified by Bhṛgu’s own experience. The statements made in the beginning — such as “annam brahma”, etc., are not falsehoods. They are momentary truths. There is an important place for physical substances such as food in worldly life. The upaniṣat also praises this. As indicators of the greatness of Brahma, they are also venerable. They are useful as the means to ascend to the state of Brahma.
The process of adhyāropa-apavāda can be seen and understood in the following verses of the Bhagavadgītā —
Chapter 7, jñāna-vijñāna-jagat-jīva-Īsvara-yoga, pp 239-246
Chapter 9, rājavidyā-rājaguhya-brahma-jagat-saṃbandha-yoga, pp 276-287
Chapter 13, kṣetra-kṣetrajña-prakṛti-puruṣa-viveka-yoga, pp.349-352
Consider the following statements.
tasya kartāramapi mām viddhy-akartāram-avyayam ॥ BG 4.13
me… prakṛtiraṣṭadhā॥ - BG 7-4
raso’ham apsu ॥ - BG 7-8
jīvanaṃ sarva-bhūteṣu ॥ - BG 7-9
bījaṃ māṃ sarva-bhūtānām॥ - BG 7-10
mat-sthāni sarva-bhūtāni ॥ - BG 9-4
na ca mat-sthāni bhūtāni ॥ -BG 9-5
na sat tan-nāsad-ucyate ॥ - BG 13-12
mamaivāṃśo jīvaloke ॥ - BG 15-7
Many statements like the above appear to be mutually inconsistent and opposite. In some places, it is said that the paravastu does not have any form : “avyakto’yam acintyo’yam। avikāryo’yam” (2-25); in some other places it is said that it has many forms (as seen in the above statements); in some places it is said to be without any activity; in others it is said that it is responsible for all the activities of the universe. If we look at these statements as adhyāropa-apavāda, the incongruencies disappear and they become the means to realisation of reality.
We are all familiar with the immediate world around us. That is prakṛti. Our deliberation starts from there. The main stages are as below.
1. Adhyāropa: The universe is Brahma, because it is a work of Brahma. The product is just another form of the origin. Thus, the whole universe is a manifestation of Brahma.
Apavāda: The universe is a conglomeration of things that are liable to change and destruction. Brahma is unchanging, eternal. The characteristics of the universe do not match with those of Brahma.2. Adhyāropa: The jīva energizes inanimate objects of the universe. The jīva, which is hidden within the physically perceptible body, is an aspect of Brahma-consciousness. That is Brahma.
Apavāda: The jīva performs many karmas and attains puṇya and pāpa. But Brahma is unattached. It is neither the doer nor the enjoyer.3. Adhyāropa: Shouldn’t there be a master to rule over the universe and protect his devotees? That master is Īśvara. He is Brahma.
Apavāda: Īśvara is associated with prakṛti. Therefore he is not pure Brahma.4. Adhyāropa: Prakṛti is an organ of Brahma. “me prakṛtiḥ”, “mayā-tatam-idam”
Apavāda: Prakṛti is only a playful activity or līlā of Brahma. It is not an organ of Brahma. Therefore, it does not find a place in the eternal and complete existence of Brahma.
The deliberation continues thus in steps. The adhyāropa-statements above are not falsehoods. They are partly true, and are also illusory truths. They require further refinement. The refinements come from the apavāda-statements. An easy thing is pointed at and we are asked to recognise it. Once that is done, we are asked to move beyond it. Once that is also done, we move further beyond. Finally, the principle is comprehended, speech stops.
adhyāropāpavādābhyāṃ niṣprapañcaṃ prapañcyate ॥
(Attributed to Bhagavān Upavarṣa)
Brahma is devoid of form, quality, activity or modification. Ascribing a form to it is limiting; activity is change in form; guṇa is a result of activity. These are the characteristics of the things in the physical universe. Brahma does not have any of these limitations. It is infinite.
Just as a father enjoys watching his children playing, even though he doesn’t take part in them, Paramātmā is a pure witness watching the play of the universe, without participating in it. How can such a profound mystery be explained without a proper pedagogical method?
To be continued...
The present series is a modern English translation of DVG’s Kendra Sahitya Akademi Award-winning work, Bhagavad-gītā-tātparya or Jīvana-dharma-yoga. The translators wish to express their thanks to Śatāvadhāni R Ganesh for his valuable feedback and to Hari Ravikumar for his astute edits.
Footnotes
[1]Superimposition and rescinsion.
[2]A kind of margarine made of vegetable oils. It was very commonly used as an inexpensive alternative to ghee.
[3]The great bear
