This is also a question that has not escaped the consideration of the Upanishadic Teachers. But instead of getting caught in the endless inquiry of external causes, they rather chose to take the different angle of inquiring into the inquirer. Sri Ramana Maharshi had famously said that the only philosophical question one need to resolve is 'who am I'. And, those of you who are familiar with Jiddu Krishnamurthy's teachings would have heard his famous retort to complicated questions: "Have you enquired into who is the one asking the question?"
In the Upanishadic texts, the best exposition of the treatment of this topic is found in the highly renowned text of Kenopanishad. This upanishad is from the Samaveda and is located within the Talavakara Brahmana, thus deriving its other name of Talavakara Upanishad. 'Kena' in sanskrit is the question 'By whom ?'. The Upanishad opens with this question:
"keneshitam patati prekshitam manah
kena praana prathama preithiyuktah
keneshitam vaachamimaam vadanti
chakshu srotram ka u devo unakti"
"Impelled by who does the mind proceed (helplessly) to its targets? Impelled by who does the life force draw the first breath? Urged by who ( the organs of) speech deliver the words ? What divine being directs the eye and ears (to see and hear)? "
The question is simple and straight forward; from where does the inanimate, material organs of the body - the eyes, ears, speech and the mind - derive their sense of purpose? After all, the organs of the body are nothing but a bunch of tissues and cells that react to proteins and create physical or chemical reactions. Today, thanks to the scientific researches, we know that the genes make each cell behave differently. While we do know that genes cause certain behaviors. do we know who or what is behind the 'sense of purpose' that each organ appears to carry? We find that this sense of purpose is not limited to one organ but is a continuum that transcends their individual programmed behaviors and even makes these inanimate, unintelligent organs to collaborate with each other! What is the source of that intelligence? This is the underlying question.
And, the Rishi answers: "I cannot tell you that we know it. Neither that we do not know. We have a problem in explaining what it is". Why?
"na tatra chakshur gachati na vaak gachati no manah
na vidmo na jaaneemo yathaithanusishyaat"
"It is beyond perception, it is beyond description and it is even beyond the mind's ability to conceptualize. We do not know or understand how knowledge of such a thing can be instructed though a teaching"
Well, that is not very helpful, isn't it? But, don't loose heart and look deeper. What the Rishi is saying is that do not look for the answer using the instrumental means of knowledge because any answer you are going to find through them is going to be subject to the endless, recursive inquiry of cause and effect. But the realization of the true nature of our own self, that is beyond the means of instruments of knowledge, is not entrapped by the recursive inquiry. What kind of realization is that?
"pratibodhaviditam matham amritatvam hi vindhate
aatmanaa vindhate veeryam vidyayaa vindathe amritam"
"This knowledge (of own self) is constant through every iota of time and by gaining it, one also gains immortality. With the self is gained virility and with the knowledge is gained immortality"
All knowledge gained through mind are subject to the limitation of time, which means that there are times when such knowledge is not available to the one who has gained it, for example in sleep. And, with death, all such knowledge gained in the life come to an end. This is not so with self-realization which is not a knowledge established in the mind but embedded in the spirit.
The rishi knows that his answer has been extremely cryptic and more than likely to go over the head of his beloved students. In order to add clarity, the Rishi now turns to narrating a metaphorical story.
Once upon a time, the Devaas (the celestial beings who are on the proper side of ethical living) had engaged in a battle with the Asuras (the demonic cousins of the Devas) and managed to win the battle after a long struggle. Having attained it, the Devaas were gloating over the victory because they considered it to have resulted solely from their powers. And, at that time, there appeared a mysterious Being, Yaksha, in front of them. No Deva could recognize who that is. The Devaas turned to the Fire God, Agni, to go an d find out who this Yaksha is. When Agni approached him, the Yaksha asked Agni who Agni was and Agni promptly responded saying he is 'Jaataveda', one who knows everything that is born. And then the Yaksha asked Agni what is that he is capable of and Agni said, "I can burn down anything'. The Yaksha threw a blade of dried grass in front and asked Agni if he can burn it. How much so over he tried, Agni couldn't burn that one blade of grass and he returned back surprised and dejected. The wind God, Vaayu, now picked up the challenge to figure out who the Yaksha is. The same sequence of interaction followed and when asked what he could do, Vaayu responded that he can blow anything away. The Yaksha again threw the blade of dried grass in front and asked Vaayu to blow it away. Again, how much so over the mighty Vaayu tried, he couldn't move that one blade of grass. Vaayu also returned totally surprised and dejected. The Devaas now turned to their leader, Indra, and asked him to go and find out who the Yaksha is. When Indra approached the Yaksha and asked who he was, the Yaksha vanished and in his place appeared the very resplendent Goddess Uma Haimavati. Indra asked Uma Haimavati who the Yaksha was. She reponded: 'That was Brahman. It is because of him that you have become victorious'.
What can we make out of this story? First and foremost, ethicl living is a pre-requisite for anyone seeking the Brahman because it was the Devaas who sought him and not the Asuraas. Secondly, there are essentially only two ways in which we can know about anything. One, like fire that burns down anything, we can analyze, understand and establish something to be what it is. Otheriwise like wind that can blow anything away, we can analyze, understand and establish something to be what it is not. When it comes to knowledge of Brahman, both these capacities prove to be insufficient. We are able to know something to be what it is or what it is not because of the intelligence that comes from Brahman and hence the same intelligence cannot be applied to know itself. To know Brahman, the way is to approach it with our entire spirit and seek assistance from the instructions of the Upanishadic knowledge. If you will notice, the Goddess who appIears in the story is called 'Uma' which is formed by the last two syllables of pranava 'Aum'. She is also addressed as 'Haimavati', who is white as the snow, again indicating the purity and serenity of the Upanishadic knowledge that has emanated from the Himalaya mountains.
The Kenopanishad then continues to provide a number of Upaasana instructions for meditating on Brahman The upanishad concludes reinforcing that self-realization is achieved only through dharmic living, intense contemplation and meditation.
.
"thasyai thapo dhama karmethi prathishtah
vedaa sarvaangaani satyam aayatanam"
Intense contemplation, ethical living and (self-less, dedicated) action (performed with a sense of worship) are its means. The Vedaas are its limbs and Truth is its abode."
Jiddu Krishnamurthy has expressed a very similar thought most eloquently in his journal: (Krishnamurti's Journal, Page 161):
"It is the observer and the observed. Its gods are its own projections and the worship of them is the worship of yourself. What lies beyond thought, beyond the known, may not be imagined or made a myth of or made a secret for the few. It is there for you to see"
Once upon a time, the Devaas (the celestial beings who are on the proper side of ethical living) had engaged in a battle with the Asuras (the demonic cousins of the Devas) and managed to win the battle after a long struggle. Having attained it, the Devaas were gloating over the victory because they considered it to have resulted solely from their powers. And, at that time, there appeared a mysterious Being, Yaksha, in front of them. No Deva could recognize who that is. The Devaas turned to the Fire God, Agni, to go an d find out who this Yaksha is. When Agni approached him, the Yaksha asked Agni who Agni was and Agni promptly responded saying he is 'Jaataveda', one who knows everything that is born. And then the Yaksha asked Agni what is that he is capable of and Agni said, "I can burn down anything'. The Yaksha threw a blade of dried grass in front and asked Agni if he can burn it. How much so over he tried, Agni couldn't burn that one blade of grass and he returned back surprised and dejected. The wind God, Vaayu, now picked up the challenge to figure out who the Yaksha is. The same sequence of interaction followed and when asked what he could do, Vaayu responded that he can blow anything away. The Yaksha again threw the blade of dried grass in front and asked Vaayu to blow it away. Again, how much so over the mighty Vaayu tried, he couldn't move that one blade of grass. Vaayu also returned totally surprised and dejected. The Devaas now turned to their leader, Indra, and asked him to go and find out who the Yaksha is. When Indra approached the Yaksha and asked who he was, the Yaksha vanished and in his place appeared the very resplendent Goddess Uma Haimavati. Indra asked Uma Haimavati who the Yaksha was. She reponded: 'That was Brahman. It is because of him that you have become victorious'.
What can we make out of this story? First and foremost, ethicl living is a pre-requisite for anyone seeking the Brahman because it was the Devaas who sought him and not the Asuraas. Secondly, there are essentially only two ways in which we can know about anything. One, like fire that burns down anything, we can analyze, understand and establish something to be what it is. Otheriwise like wind that can blow anything away, we can analyze, understand and establish something to be what it is not. When it comes to knowledge of Brahman, both these capacities prove to be insufficient. We are able to know something to be what it is or what it is not because of the intelligence that comes from Brahman and hence the same intelligence cannot be applied to know itself. To know Brahman, the way is to approach it with our entire spirit and seek assistance from the instructions of the Upanishadic knowledge. If you will notice, the Goddess who appIears in the story is called 'Uma' which is formed by the last two syllables of pranava 'Aum'. She is also addressed as 'Haimavati', who is white as the snow, again indicating the purity and serenity of the Upanishadic knowledge that has emanated from the Himalaya mountains.
The Kenopanishad then continues to provide a number of Upaasana instructions for meditating on Brahman The upanishad concludes reinforcing that self-realization is achieved only through dharmic living, intense contemplation and meditation.
.
"thasyai thapo dhama karmethi prathishtah
vedaa sarvaangaani satyam aayatanam"
Intense contemplation, ethical living and (self-less, dedicated) action (performed with a sense of worship) are its means. The Vedaas are its limbs and Truth is its abode."
Jiddu Krishnamurthy has expressed a very similar thought most eloquently in his journal: (Krishnamurti's Journal, Page 161):
"It is the observer and the observed. Its gods are its own projections and the worship of them is the worship of yourself. What lies beyond thought, beyond the known, may not be imagined or made a myth of or made a secret for the few. It is there for you to see"
