English
, man’s Self, spiritual soul, discriminated from the physical part, art not different from ‘That’, Sat, the Real, the Existence, the divine essence, which pervades the whole world, as salt pervades the sea ; or, ‘thou,’ while Nescience is not removed by the true knowledge, didst seem to be something by thyself, art, in reality, nothing apart from ‘That’, Sat, the True, the Self, the divine essence of the universe, Nmra, the Lord. This conclusion is arrived at by the method called ( ), i. c., by close reasoning surrender- ing the contradictory portions of ‘That’ and ‘thou,’ viz., omniscient, omnipresent, infinite, sinless, &c., of ‘That’ ( the Lord ), and parviscient, limited, finite, and sinful, &c., of ‘thou’ ( man ), and establishing the identity of ‘That’, the supreme Self, and ‘thou’, the personal Self. This Indication ( ) must be thoroughly understood in order to compre- hend the purport of the great saying — 'Tat tvam asiJ This is a characteristic system of the Vedanta and has been lately introduced in Europe and America. It is termed “ the System of Identity.” The distinction of different Selfs is due to limiting adjuncts only, while the unity of all Selfs is natural and original. For on the doctrine of the non-difference of the individual soul (^T^) and the highest Self, the Ved^lnta texts insist again and again. Hence, i. e., because the non-difference of all Selfs 1. The Brahma-SHtras IV, 1, 2-3. 171 is essential ( their difference ( ^ ) due to Nescience only, the individual soul, After hav- ing dispelled Nescience by true knowledge, passes over into unity ( (^?rr ) with the highest Self. For this is indicated by scripture, cp. e. g., (Mund. Up. Ill, 2, 9.) '"He who knows that highest Brahman becomes even Brahman ; ( Brih. Up. IV, 4.6. ) "Being Brahman he goes to Brahman’’.^ The relation of the two may be viewed as follows. Just as the light of the sun ( sran^T*) and its substra- tum, i. e , the sun himself ( ), are not absolute- ly different — for they both consist of fire — (light ) and yet are spoken of as different, so also the soul and the highest Self. ( The Br. Sii. Ill, 2, 28 ). Thus there is essential oneness of the Divine and the human. Adjuncts make extrinsic difference, but in reality there is intrinsic oneness. If there is but one Infinite God, the individual soul also can, in its true essence, be nothing but God. If there really existed anything besides. He would no longer be Infinite God in the highest sense. This same VedAntic metaphor of the sun is employed by the religio-philosophical writers and poets of almost all countries for establishing the same eternal oneness of human and divine nature, the Self of the VedAnta. It is summarized as follows: — ‘They say, the sun is not the sun, unless it shines forth j and God is not God unless he shines forth, i. e., unless He manifests himself. ‘All the rays of the sun are of the sun, they can never be separated from it, though their oneness with 1. The Srahma-SHtras III, 2, 25-26. 172 the source of light may for a time be obscured by in- tervening dart ness All the rays of God^ every soul, every son of God, is of God; they cannot be separated from God, though their oneness with the Divine Source may for a time be obscured by self-hood, passion, and sin. ‘Every ray is different from the other rays ; yet there cannot be any substantial difference between them. Each soul is different from the other souls ; yet there cannot beany substantial difference between them. 'As soon as the intervening darkness is removed,each ray is seen to be a part of the sun, and yet apart from it and from the other rays. As soon as the interven- ing ignorance is removed, each soul knows itself to be a part of God, and yet apart from God and from the other souls. ‘No ray is lost, and though it seems to be a ray by itself, it remains for ever what it has always been, not separated from the light, nor lost in the light, but ever present in the sim. No soul is lost, and though it seems to be a soul by itself, it remains for ever what it always has been, not separated from God, nor lost in God, but ever present in God.’^ A Cambridge Platonist, Henry More, says : — “I came from God, am an immortal ray Of God ; O joy ! and back to God shall go.” A great German philosopher, Hegel, says : — “Positive reconciliation of God and the world is only attained at last in the revealed or Christian 1. See Dr. Max Muller’s Theosophy or Psychological BeKgion, p. 63940. 173 religion, which, in the pereon of Christ, contemplates the God-Man, the realized unity of the Divine and the human.” Now the same Reality, which pervades individual souls, pervades also the whole phenomenal Universe. That Reality or True is the one only with- out a second, though It seems, like substance, to be distributed among countless bodies which have their several qualities, natures and individuals, just as, to borrow an idea of an European thinker, the light of the sun is one, though it is intercepted by walls, mountains and other things. Or, as by one light we see, one air we breathe, on one earth we live, so by the one Real we exist. ‘In the beginning there can have been but One, as there will be but One in the end, — whether we call it Atman or Brahman’. “The mind is urged to ask for one cause of many effects ; then for the cause of that ; and again the cause, diving still into the pro- found, self-assured that it shall arrive at an absolute and sufficient one, — a one that shall be all. “In the midst of the sun is the light, in the midst of the light is truth, and in the midst of truth is the impe- rishable Being”, say the Vedas. All philosophy, of east and west, has the same centripetence. Urged by an opposite necessity, the mind returns from the One to that which is not one, but other or many; from cause to effect; and affirms the necessary existence of variety, the self-existence of both, as each is involved in the other. These strict- ly blended elements it is the problem of thought to separate and to reconcile. Their existence is mu- 3174 tually contradictory and exclusive ; and each so fast slides into the other that we can never say what is one and what it is not.”^ As stated above, man is composed of two parts — one ever-changing, phenomenal, material, mortal part, and the other never-changing, noumenal, spiritual, immortal part. While his Nescience ( ) is not removed he identifies himself with the former. When the veil of his nescience is destroyed, the light comes out and he finds that his individual soul, his real self ( ) is the spiritual part in him, which is one and the same with the highest self, Brahman. Similarly, the whole universe has two parts ; — material visible, and spiritual invisible. The material part is phenomenal, always changing. The spiritual invisible part is Is' vara, the Lord, the Demiurgus ( the active personal God of other religions ) con- ditioned by the universe penetrating and pervading the whole universe to its utmost circum- ference. The Lord is one and the same with the Highest Self which is immanent in all individual souls and the Universe, and everywhere beyond them both. The VedS,nta concludes with inexorable consistency and exclaims that these three Selfs — the Self of man, the Self of the Universe, and the Highest Self- ai’e one and identical. This may at first sight seem irreverent and mere twaddle to those who have not properly understood its deeper meaning, but it will be found in full harmony with the highest doctrines of many philosophies of the world, and wilh the most 1. "EnaBtaoxi’a Com^tte Works, Plato. Yol. I;p. 292. 175 intimate convictions of the learned and truly devoted persons of all great religions. It is the same esoteric doctrine which runs through their religious books, expressed in different words. In quoting below some parallel passages from European thinkers, to show that the fundamental ideas of the East and of the West are in full harmony with each other, it may be repeated that the com- parison and resulting similarity are of the highest interest and importance. Where both agree, the presumption is that their conclusions are correct, no less than in a case where two calculators working by different methods arrive at the same result. The Ved^ntin says: — ‘Thou art That,* i. e., the Self of God and man is the same. Christ says: — “Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they ( the men ) may also be one in us. — ’* “that they may be one even as we are one. I in them and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.*’ (St. John XVII, 21, 23). St. Paul says that; — “For in him ( God ) we live, and move, and have our being.” (Acts XVII, 28 ). In many a prayer the body is spoken of ( sftgr; ^ ^ ^^0 as the temple of God and the dweller therein, as God. In the Epistle to the Corinthians, ( 1. 3-16 ) it is said: — “Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you ?” The Mohammedan religion has the same idea in the remarkable phrase (.4nctIa/iaA;-srif^^q5) ‘I am He.’ Expressions may vary, but the underlying views are the same. 176 ^Thou art That’ is in one sense nothing but to surrender ourselves entirely to God, deadening, the love of self; to be so completely devoted as to be in God and of God ; to bring ourselves back to our Source, and our Home; to discover our mis- take and restore ourselves to our nature — our true Self-hood in God; to make God our all in all. Is not this the highest possible devotion to God ? Is it not the greatest offering we can make to our God, not only of our property and heart, but also of ourselves ? How could our life be more truly con- secrated ?