Upadesa Sahasri

Upadesa Sahasri is considered a famous Vedantic text as it contains the essence of the teaching of
the Upanishads, dealt with in an elaborate manner.
Authored by Adi Sankara, it is in two parts--one in prose form (gadhya bhaga) and the other in verse
or metric form (padhya bhaga). In the metrical form, there are 675 verses, spread over 19 chapters.
Each chapter, known as prakarana, deals with one topic. Most of the prakaranas are small except the
18th chapter, entitled Tat Tvam Asi Prakarana, which analyses the Mahavakya with 233 verses.

What It Means
2. The expression, Sahasri (a thousand), is not to be taken literally but has been used in the sense of
many verses (Bahvarte Sahasram). Upadesa has several meanings, the most popular being related to
initiation of a mantra for meditation (japa), known as mantra upadesa, where the student is just given
a mantra for mental or oral chanting (japa).
The upadesa has to be understood as a consistent and significant process of teaching for a length of
time involving study and enquiry by the student, who needs to understand and assimilate what is
revealed by the teacher.
Vedantic upadesa is a structured study of the mahavakyas contained in the Upanishads, where one
has to employ analysis, enquiry, reasoning, skills of interpretation and grammar to clearly arrive at
the intended import of the Vedantic statements, which are terse and brief. Vedanatic statements are
not intended for mere japa, but are meant for learning and understanding.
4. In this and the articles to follow, a chapterwise summary of the text will be presented, based on talks
given by Swami Paramatmananda (a reputed teacher and well-known disciple of Swami Dayananda
Sarasvati of Arsha Vidya Gurukulam) over a period of five years to his regular students. A summary of
the contents of the first chapter is given in the following paragraphs.
5. The first chapter of 26 verses is titled Upodgatha Prakaranam (introduction). It serves to introduce
the subject matter, Brahma Vidya (knowledge about Self), which is the core of Vedanta.

Six Heads
6. For convenience of study, the first chapter can be divided under six heads 1. Verses 1 and 2 forming
part of Mangala Sloka(invocation) and avatarika (preface); 2. Verses 3 to 5 establishing that Self-
knowledge is the only means for liberation; 3. Verses 6 and 7 explaining how karma (action) cannot by
itself give freedom; (4) Verses 8 to 11 presenting the views of those who consider that it is necessary to
combine karma with jnanam in the pursuit of liberation (jnana karma samuchaya vada); 5. Verses
12 to 24 where the author refutes the jnana karma samuchaya vada and 6. Verses 25 and 26 in the
form of conclusion (upasamhara), exhorting the seekers to take to jnana yoga and providing a
definition for the term, Upanishad.
7. In the first verse, which is invocatory (mangala sloka), the author offers prostration to the
attributeless (nirguna) Brahman, which is of the nature of all-pervading and all-knowing
consciousness, available for recognition in the minds of all beings and transcending everything
material in the creation.
Invocation verses in our tradition generally are in the form of blessing (asirvada), prostration
(namaskara) and present a vision of the truth (vastu nirdesa). This verse falls under the second and
also the third categories, as it contains a definition of Brahman. Its purpose is to seek the Lord’s
blessings for removal of obstacles to the compilation and for the spreading of the teaching.
The second verse introduces the subject matter , saying that the end portion of the Vedas (Vedanta)
offers the teaching of Self-knowledge after the prior part (Veda Purva) has dealt with Vedic rituals
(vaidika karma).
8. In Verses 3 to 5, the author describes briefly the cause of bondage (samsara karanam), nature of
bondage (samsara svarupam) and the remedy (samsara nivritti). The human problem of bondage is
due to ignorance of our real nature and identification with the body-mind complex which leads to a
sense of limitation and promotes an unending desire to get over this sense of inadequacy.
This in turn entangles us in a vicious circle of actions born of raga/dvesha (likes and dislikes),
resulting in punya/papa, causing a perennial cycle of birth and death, rebirth and so on. As ignorance
of the Self is the problem, the only solution is Self-knowledge (knowledge of Brahman).
Verses 6 and 7 elaborate that karma (action) cannot remove bondage as it is not opposed to ignorance.
The urge to act is born of likes and dislikes, a product of ignorance of the Self and, therefore, cannot
obviously remove ignorance.

Knowledge and Karma

9. Vedanta’s settled position is that Self-knowledge itself is capable of giving liberation and does not
need the support of any other means. However, there have been philosophers with the view that
knowledge will have to be combined with karma to give the result of freedom.
Sankaracharya presents in Verses 8 to 11 their arguments in support of their stand--jnana karma
samuchaya vada. They argue that as karmas are enjoined by the Vedas (scriptures) a vaidika cannot
give up actions, which should be performed along with the pursuit of Self-knowledge. They argue that
such karmas support jnana in achieving liberation. They also say that the Vedas talk of a special type
of sin (known as pratyavaya papa) in case karmas as laid down in the Vedas are not performed.
They cite the example of a Vedic ritual called Agnishtoma, the performance of which is certain to
produce definite and immediate results (just like jnana as claimed by Vedanta) but still depends on
several more actions, such as recital of Vedic hymns and chanting of certain verses (parayanam) and
invoking some devatas.

‘Not for Jnanis ’

10. Sankaracharya strongly refutes in Verses 12 to 24 all their arguments. First he points out that
the Vedic injunctions relating to performance of karma (Veda vidhi) are applicable only to those who
are ignorant of the real Self (Atma ajnanis) and, therefore, identify with their body-mind complex and
subject themselves to the varna ashrama discipline, while the wise people (jnanis), because of their
knowledge, have transcended varna ashrama status.
Second, knowledge is opposed to karma as the latter invokes doership (kartrutvam) while the former
by definition makes one renounce doership. The wise man knows his essential nature of
consciousness, Atma, which is changeless.
Again, knowledge takes place automatically by the mere operation of the appropriate means and the
presence of the object to be known (technically known as vastu tantram) and no separate action is
called for. On the other hand, performance of actions depends on the doer and a host of other
accessories, such as materials, time, place, etc. (technically known as Purusha Tantram).
As for the special sin (pratyaya papa) talked about for non-performance of enjoined karmas, this
provision also applies only to the ignorant people (ajnanis) who have a sense of doership and cannot
affect a jnani, who is aware of his non-doership status.

Not Appropriate
Lastly, the example of agnistoma is not appropriate (It becomes a vishama dristanta) as such rituals
require the support of materials and accessories and subsidiary actions and differ in the quality of
result of each performance.
11. The author in conclusion states in Verse 25 that for the reasons already highlighted, he proposes to
continue with the teaching related to the knowledge of Brahman in order that the student is enabled to
remove his Self-ignorance and consequently the bondage he is suffering from.
The last verse of the chapter (Verse 26) provides a grammatical derivation for the term Upanishad. The
basic root of the word is sad with two prefixes, upa and ni, and a suffix, kwip. The expression, sad,
with the suffix has three meanings, which are 1. to loosen, 2. to destroy and 3. to lead. The prefix, upa,
means ‘immediate’ (samipataha) and ni stands for nischayam (definite). The final meaning of the
term, Upanishad, is accordingly given in the verse as a teaching which immediately and definitely 1.
loosens the knot of bondage and 2. destroys rebirth and 3. leads to the attainment of Brahman.

Having established in the first chapter that Self-ignorance is the cause of samsara and that Self-
knowledge is the only means for liberation by negating the need for karma as a supporting sadhana,
Sankaracharya begins the actual Vedantic teaching in the second chapter, entitled Pratisheda
Prakaranam (topic of negation).

This small chapter with only four verses provides a clear insight into how the scriptures communicate
the teaching about the Self. The discussion in the verses is highly subtle and technical in the area of the
process of how knowledge takes place (Pramana Sastram).

Three Components
Knowledge of external objects involves three constituents: 1. The knower (pramata) 2. The instrument
of knowledge (pramanam) and 3. the object of knowledge (prameyam). By the operation of
the Pramanam (instrument) the knower (pramatha) gains the knowledge (prama) of the object. The
position is different in the context of Self-knowledge (Atma Jnanam or Brahma Jnanam). Here
the Sastravakyam (scriptural statement) is the instrument (pramanam), which has the job of
revealing Atma or Brahman(prameyam), which is non-different from myself, the knower (pramata).

As Atma or Brahman is not an object of knowledge by definition, the question arises as to how
the Upanishad (scriptures) can be considered as pramanam to reveal Brahman. Scriptures have,
therefore, a serious problem in providing the seeker with the Vedantic teaching (Self-knowledge)

Fortunately, however, as Atma (Brahman) is self-evident as the ever present Consciousness

(chaitanyam) in the form of ‘I’ (aham), Sruti need not reveal it. However, whenever we use the
expression ‘I,’ we experience along with the awareness the intellect, the mind, body and the external
world, all of which are intrinsically inert (jadam) but illumined by the awareness, directly in the case of
the intellect and mind and indirectly in the case of the body and the external world.

While we can easily exclude the external world as different from ‘I,’ there is a problem with regard to
the intellect, mind and the body. If we take ‘I’ to be the ‘I’ together with body-mind complex, as we
are all normally disposed to do, this ‘I’ will be subject to the attributes and limitations of the body-mind
complex.

Sruti, therefore, has to do the job of only negating the body and its attributes, mind and its attributes
and intellect and its attributes as part of the object of awareness ‘I’ and not as part of awareness itself.
The limitations of the body, mind and intellect are also objects of the awareness ‘I’ and not part of ‘I.’

Negation Process
This process of separation of body-mind and intellect from ‘I,’ which is purely cognitive and
intellectual, is technically referred to in this first verse as pratisheda (negation). The author, therefore,
points out in this verse that once the body-mind-intellect complex is negated as ‘I am not this,’ ‘I am
not this,’ what is left behind is the ‘I’ awareness (pure consciousness) which is unnegatable. This
methodology of negation is based on the famous teaching contained in the Brihadaranyaka
Upanishad, ‘Neti, neti.’ By employing this process, the student gets to understand clearly the Self
without needing any other specific pramanam to support this conclusion.

Shedding Ahankara
The author deals with a problem generally faced by spiritual seekers in clearly distinguishing the ‘I’-
thought in the mind (otherwise called ahankara) from Pure Awareness (witness consciousness
otherwise known as Sakshi Chaitanyam). While we are able to negate external objects, and even the
body-mind complex as non-Self (anatma) we encounter difficulty in dismissing ahankara as an object
of consciousness.

Sankaracharya establishes in this verse that ahankara is also to be considered as an object and negated
as anatma. The logic generally given in the scriptures for this negation of ahankara is our deep sleep
experience where ahankara is totally resolved and Pure Awareness remains as witness.

In our waking state, both ‘I,’ the pure awareness and ahankara are intimately mixed up, resulting in
our inability to distinguish one from the other. In sleep, I continue to exist without any attributes, such
as ahankara, but unfortunately I cannot recognise Atma as I am asleep and as I need a mind for such
cognition. Therefore, the scriptures say that I have to use the sleep experience to know that I am the
witness consciousness.

The ‘I’ thought or ahankara is defined as the mind along with the reflected consciousness (pratibimba
chaitanyam), while I am the original Consciousness (bimba chaitanyam). The author clarifies in the
second verse that the ‘I’-thought arises in the mind. It has ahankara as its object and all these three
are to be negated as non-Self (anatma) and, therefore, as unreal (mithya). Thus, the knower
(pramata), the instrument (pramanam) and the object (prameyam) are all unreal and need to be
negated, leaving behind the unnegatable Atma, ‘I’ the Witness Consciousness.
What about Jivan Muktas?
The author also answers the question whether the triad of knower, instrument and known will operate
in the case of a wise person who has gained Self-knowledge (jivan mukta). The jnani will employ the
triad for conduct of day-to-day transactions (vyavahara) with clear understanding of its unreality
(mithyatvam). Samsara will not afflict the wise person and will remain only like a defanged cobra.

While to be Brahman I do not need to be a pramata, to listen to the Mahavakya, Aham Brahmasmi (I
am Brahman), I should be a pramata consisting of the original consciousness, reflected consciousness
and the mind. This is true also in the case of my claiming ‘I am Brahman,” as I need to entertain that
thought (vritti). Thus, I have to use my status as pramata for any vyavaharaas a ‘dress’ (referred to
as kanjukam by Sri Suresvaracaharya in his famous work, Naishkarmya Siddhi).

Though both ignorant and wise men (ajnani and jnani) use their pramatrutvam for vyavahara, the
wise man has a clear understanding of his real nature as Sakshi Chaitanyam, while the ignorant
person identifies himself with ahankara.

The author answers a possible doubt in the third verse. Prior to the advent of Self-knowledge one has a
strong identification with ahankara, proved by his direct experience (pratyaksha pramanam).
However, with the use of Sruti pramanan, he gains Self-knowledge and is able to negate
his pramata (ahankara) status. The doubt that can arise is whether the new knowledge revealed
by Sruti Pramanam has itself the risk of being negated by any other pramanam (just as what was
perceived as a snake earlier is later on seen as a rope with the advent of rope knowledge, replacing the
prior snake knowledge). Sankaracharya dismisses this doubt by saying that Self-knowledge can never
be negated as any new cognition has to be illumined only by the Witness Consciousness, which enjoys
eternal independent existence.

Assimilation Process
In the concluding verse of this chapter (Verse 4), the author highlights the need for a spiritual seeker to
assimilate the teaching received from the Acharya. This has to be done by a process of discrimination
(like Panchakosa Viiveka, Avastatraya Viveka) and by using well known methods of reasoning
(anvaya vyatireka, adhyaropa/apavada) own himself up as Atma which is non-different
from Brahman.

To illustrate this point, Sankaracharya refers to a story recounted in Chandogya Upanishad (Ch. 6 M.
Il) of a man taken away by robbers and left in the middle of a dense forest with his eyes blindfolded and
later on rescued by a compassionate person who guides him back to his own country. The robbers are
compared to ignorance and attachment while the blindfolding is compared to loss of discriminatory
power. The compassionate person is the guru and his guidance is in the form of Sastra Pramanam,
based on which the seeker has to gain Self-knowledge.

Compiled by R. B. Athreya from the lectures of Swami Paramarthananda in Chennai.