View source for Mandukya Karika Lecture 123 on 04-October-2023

== Full Transcript (Not Corrected) ==
We have come to the last chapter, ''Alatha Shanthi Prakarnam''. We have discussed up to the 13th Karika of this 4th chapter. This 4th chapter has 100 Karikas or ''shlokas''. Mainly, in this last chapter, Gaudapada is trying to refute all the other schools of philosophy that accept creation in this world.

In our last class, we discussed how Gaudapada refuted ''Satkaryavada'' and ''Asatkaryavada'' in five Karikas. Now, we come to ''Mimamsavada''. There are many schools of philosophy like ''Nyaya, Vaiseshika, Sankhya'', and ''Yoga'', and their views have been thoroughly refuted by Gaudapada. In this ''Advaita Vedanta'' using ''Ajati Vada,'' he argues that creation was never there, so seeking the cause of creation is a futile endeavor.

Now, let's focus on ''Purvamimamsa''. While the other schools of philosophy may not be very interesting or relevant for us, the ''Purvamimamsa'' school of philosophy is exceptionally influential. Whenever I talk, I am referring to the ''Purvamimamsa'' system. What is this ''Purvamimamsa'' system? It is based on the first part of the ''Vedas''. As I've mentioned before, ''Vedas'' are divided into two parts: ''Karma Kanda'' and ''Jnana Kanda''. I prefer to call the first part ''Dharma Kand''a, and the second part ''Brahma Kanda'' or Bhagavata ''Kanda.'' The reason for this preference is that ''Jnana Kanda'' represents knowledge, which is often equated with ''Jnana Margam''. However, these are two separate concepts. ''Jnanam'' means knowledge of ''Brahma'', ''Bhagawan'', which equates to God realization—a common goal across various paths such as ''Bhakti Yoga, Karma Yoga, Raja Yoga'', and ''Jnana Yoga''. These paths differ, but all lead to the same destination.

This was the primary teaching of Sri Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda: there are infinite paths to the infinite God, infinite ways of reaching God, all of which can be classified into these four paths: the path of emotion, the path of activity, the path of mind control or rationality, and the path of knowledge and intellect. While many who follow the path of knowledge may not accept it, ''Advaita Vedanta'' has gained theoretical supremacy. In practice, however, we tend to follow the ''Dvaita Marga'' (the path of duality) because we perceive duality everywhere. We observe three types of differences: ''Vijatiya Bheda, Sajatiya Bheda, and Swagata Bheda'', with ''Swagata Bheda'' being particularly prominent in our daily lives. We see changes in our bodies and minds constantly. My body has many parts. In fact the word body is not a limb but the name for the totality of all the parts of the body. Similarly mind is the combination of ''Manaha, Chitta, Buddi'' and ''Ahankara.'' And it is changing all the time. So we are in the world of duality.

In this context, the ''Mimamsaka'' system of ''Dharma Kanda'', often known as ''Karma Kanda'', is exceptionally significant. Until we attain a certain level, almost knocking at the door of ''Bhagawan'', whether it is ''Vaikuntha, Kailasa'' or ''Devi Loka'', we remain bound by the world of ''Karma Kand''a, which I prefer to call ''Dharma Kanda''. Now, let's address the question of ''Srishti'', the main point that ''Advaita Vedant''a, especially Gaudapada, takes to the extreme: there is no creation at all.

We must be intelligent enough to understand that Gaudapada isn't a madcap; he comprehends that he exists. To whom is he writing? He has composed these Mandukya Karikas and commented on the Mandukya Upanishad. Is he writing in a state of ''Samadhi,'' completely unified with ''Brahma''? No, he has a body and a mind, and he feels compelled to write for an audience in the created world. The moment we enter into the realm of body and mind, differentiation becomes inevitable. So why does he continue to speak? He speaks because, as Sri Ramakrishna also mentions, there are many paths, unlike those who emphasize that there is only one ''Jnana Marg''a. Even among those who follow ''Jnana Marga'', there are broadly two types of people: a small number insist that ''Jnana Marg''a is the sole path to ''Mukti, Moksha'', or liberation, while most agree that ''Bhagawan''<nowiki/>'s grace is essential for ''Jnana'' to manifest. It's crucial for us to understand this point. Gaudapada, too, accepts this, but he wishes to discuss the ultimate goal. So we should never mistake while studying Gaudapada he is talking at the beginning also of only the final step. No! When we are studying in the nursery, elementary, middle, high school, college he will be only talking about ''Karmakandas, Srishti'' is real etc.

''Advaita Vedanta'' employs a process called ''Adhyaropa'' and ''Apavada.'' Until an individual reaches a certain level of readiness (''Adhikari''), they accept ''Adhyaropa'', where creation is considered real, including the body and mind. However, as they progress, they should gradually transcend this perspective and enter into ''Brahmavada''. Gaudapada was not so unintelligent to say that for everybody this ''Ajati Vada,'' non-creation theory will be appealing. Now this is a small background so that there is no misunderstanding either about Gaudapada or about ''Ajati Vada''.

In conclusion, Gaudapada's aim is to establish that the ultimate realization in spirituality is ''Advaita'', where one understands that they are none other than ''Brahma''. That's what Sri Ramakrishna also accepts fully. He says ''Advaita'' is the last word. However, for most people, ''Dharma Kanda'' and ''Srishti'' remain vital aspects of their spiritual journey. To understand concepts like ''Samsara'' and ''Karma Siddhanta'', which are closely related, it is essential to grasp the importance of ''Srishti''. Gaudapada addresses these topics from Karika 14 to Karika 23, in ten Karikas, which we will discuss in today's class. In my last class I have quickly read out, chanted, those 14th to 23rd. I am not going to repeat them. So let me just give a very short summary before we go into this.

What is the problem with creation? Do we have any problems with creation? Can we have a problem with creation if creation is perfect? What does that mean? Creation and perfection are diametrically opposed, like light and darkness. What is creation? Time, space, and causation. That means limitedness. So everything in this world is limited. My body is limited, my mind is limited, and my happiness is limited, and my unhappiness is also limited. Supposing, just supposing, that I am in an absolutely happy state, which can never be, which should not be. I will tell you why in just a moment.

If creation is very happy, there are no enemies, always happiness, perfect weather, perfect health, perfect both body and mind, and then there is no death. Eternally, we would be living. If this were true, nobody could have any objections. So people would not go to wars. They would not cheat each other because a happy person can never do anything wrong. This is a great truth; please try to remember it. A happy person can never do anything unhappy because anything wrong is that which creates unhappiness, and when a person is happy, they will never be able to do it. It is impossible for them to do it.

So, let us look at this creation and how we are looking at it because we can never experience creation except through this body-mind complex. What is the first thing we notice? Everything is limited. Everything is imperfect, and everything seems to have better and better aspects that I do not have or we do not have at this moment. Birth is a fact. Growth is a fact, and death is a fact. Everything is transitory. Friends become enemies, enemies become friends, loved ones become hateful ones, hateful people become loving ones, but nothing is steady. Nothing remains unchanged. All the time, it is changing, and that is the most unsettling thing. It creates tremendous longing.

Take the example of a baby. It sees the mother very happy, doesn't see the mother unhappy. If this separation between the baby and the mother goes on for a long time, then both the mother and the baby experience intolerable anguish. That is the problem. There is a problem with this ''Srishti'', theory of creation. There are, of course, people who do not think about it, and they are ready to accept it, provided it is not extreme. Nobody will accept ''Srishti'' if the suffering is too much or more than what could be tolerated. And a point will come; nobody wants death, nobody wants unhappiness, nobody wants suffering, nobody wants pain. In fact, we do everything in our power to get rid of uncertainty, ignorance, and unhappiness, ''asat, achit,'' and ''dukkha''. It is instinctive to get rid of these three. Just recollect, we never even make the slightest effort to get rid of ''sat, chit'', and ''ananda''. When we are secure and happy, we know, and we are happy; it is the most natural state. So there is a problem. What is the problem? Everything is uncertain. Everything is different. Everybody is different, and every different thing, every different person is changing all the time. That is what Sri Ramakrishna calls the third commandment: always practice discrimination. Everything is temporary. God alone is permanent. So there is a big problem with this creation.

Now, in this background, let us come to the ''Karma Siddhanta''. What is the relationship between ''Srishti'' and ''Karma Siddhanta''? So, I am born like this. Each one of us is born like this to these parents, and nobody is absolutely happy for some time, temporarily maybe, not forever because even if everything is okay, there is a longing for something more, for something better, for something higher all the time. But birth is beset with problems, growth is beset with problems, middle age, old age, disease, enemies, death—everything is beset with problems. This is exactly what ''Bhagavan Buddha'' was trying to address. And what is the root cause he found out? ''Trushna'', thirst. That is insatiable thirst for something better. Actually, what we want are only two things: I want to be eternal, I want to be infinite. I want to transcend time, space, and causation because time and space are differing because of cause. That is called the ''Karma Siddhanta''.

Now, very briefly, let us talk about this ''Karma Siddhanta.'' What is it? Why am I like this? Because of my ''poorva janma karma.'' So if I did not have a body before, I could not have done ''karma'', and if I did not have ''karma,'' I would not have done what I have done in my past life. Why does this question come up? As I mentioned, if I am extremely happy all the time, which is impossible. Why is it impossible? Because happiness is a feeling, and if you are having the same feeling, then you lose that feeling because feeling requires distinctness. You are healthy, then you know what is unhealthy. You are unhealthy, then you know what is healthy. That is why the funny definition of health: health means forgetfulness. Do you remember your tooth? Only when it is aching. Until that time, did you ever think about your tooth? Absolutely no. If God assures each one of us that our teeth will be perfect no matter what we do, then brushing the teeth will not arise at all. So everything has to be brushed: the body has to be brushed, hands have to be brushed, legs have to be brushed, and, of course, the most important thing to brush is our brain. For each one of us, it is periodically wave-like happiness followed by unhappiness, followed by happiness, followed by health, followed by unhappiness, followed by happiness, unhealthiness, etc. Everything goes in a wave-like motion. But do we accept it? No. We want it to be uniform. In this world, uniformity means death. It is the multiplicity that is called life.

Swami Vivekananda makes this statement so beautifully and explains it, especially in his ''Jnana Yoga.'' So, for those who are interested, please read Swami Vivekananda's lectures on Jnana Yoga. It's most marvellous. Without that background understanding, Upanishads will be extremely difficult.

Coming back to our subject, we see this world in front of us, and what is our normal reaction? You take any object. You see a pen, and that is an object. An object is called an effect, and we cannot conceive that an effect called pen suddenly exists for all eternity. It was not there, it is there, and it will not be there, ''Srishti, Sthiti, Laya''. So, whatever is temporarily experienceable is called an effect, but we don't see the cause. So, why a pot? Pot is the very famous example. That's why Shankaracharya has written in his ''Brihadaranyaka Upanishad'', especially in the beginning of the ''Brihadaranyaka'', it is called ''Ghatabhashyam''. Why is it called ''Ghatabhashyam''? ''Ghata'' means pot. Why is it called Potbhashyam? Because this word pot, I mean Shankaracharya's ''Bhashyam'', occurs umpteen number of times. That is why his followers named it ''Ghatabhashyam.''

And in our last class, ''Satkaryavada.'' So, this is what we are discussing now. We must keep those things, ''Satkarya, Asatkarya'', in mind. With that, we have to discuss what is ''Mimamsaka''<nowiki/>'s view. So, everything in this world, who created? Can God create? No, he cannot create. God means, here we are talking about ''Advaita Vedanta''. So, God means ''Brahman. Brahman'' is infinite. ''Brahman'' is one. ''Brahman'' is changeless. Let us take ''Brahman'' is one. If we see a pot, there are at least minimum two causes necessary. The intelligent cause, who is called the pot maker, and the material cause, which is called clay. Without clay and without this potter, it is impossible for the clay to make itself into a pot.

Now, this is what we see with regard to every single object in this world. Therefore, we also have to apply the same rule to this entire universe. Since we are experiencing it, it is called an object. Only, instead of saying it is a house, it is a tree, it is a person, we say it is the world. So, ''Brahman'' should have, must have created because this ''Jagat'' is a ''Karyam'', and this ''Karyam'' must have been created by ''Bhagavan''. It is impossible for ''Bhagavan'' to create. This is the first point we have to understand in today's class. Impossible for ''Bhagavan''. For several reasons. What is the first reason? So, to create, the creator must be separate, and the material should be separate. So, ''Brahman'' as the creator and as the raw material, both one, two in one is impossible according to the definition given in the Upanishads, as well as often discussed by our commentators or learned pundits, etc.

According to ''Advaita Vedanta'', it is impossible for ''Brahman'' to split Himself into two. That is the first point. Second, by accepting somehow it is possible, like milk becoming curds. If ''Brahman'' changes into this world, the changeless ''Brahman'' changes into the changeful world. That is an illogical statement, like saying the horns of a hare or the son of a barren woman or the cooling waters in the mirage, etc. It is impossible. It is impossible. It is impossible for ''Brahman'' to create.

But what is our experience? That we see the entire world, and it is the only reality. Whenever you have the habit of repeating "''Brahma Satyam, Jagann Mithya''," don't do that. In fact, what you should do is "''Brahma Mithya, Jagat Satyam''," because your action and reaction always follow your conviction this world alone is real, whether it be in the dream state or in the waking state. Of course, in the deep sleep state, there is no world, there is no action, there is no reaction. That is why it gives so much peace. So, ''Brahman'' cannot, could not have created the world is the first point we have to understand.

The next point is a very important point. What is that? Just now I mentioned. If per chance, by any chance, ''Brahman'' can create, ''Brahman'' cannot remain like milk and at the same time become curds. ''Brahman'' cannot remain as ''Brahman'' and, by definition, ''Brahman'' is what? ''Nitya. Nitya'' means changeless. ''Ananta'' means infinite. ''Anadi'' means beginningless. So, a changeless something, eternally changeless something. We cannot even posit as changing something. This is the second point. What is the third point? It is, we discussed it already, but I am reminding ourselves. What is it? Supposing ''Brahman'' has become this world, then you, after many, many, many births, you become wise, you become an ''Adhikari, Sadhana Chatushtaya Sampanna Adhikari.'' Then you start practicing spiritual disciplines, and you get a ''Sadguru'', and you progress in spiritual life, and finally, you come to know you are ''Brahman''. You are not the body-mind. Supposing you reach that state, and this is what you call ''Moksha'', and when you reach that ''Moksha'', what happens? Once there was a creation, what is the guarantee that you will not be again falling into this, first what is called inorganic, then organic, then amoeba, then birds, then trees, then animals, then lower human beings, and like that, the same rigmarole. What is the guarantee? Because once something happens, it can happen many times. These are some of the problems.

Therefore, ''Brahman'' cannot be the creator. Now, we see the world, we think it is real. According to ''Advaita Vedanta'', this is not real. But according to all other schools, ''Dvaita Vedantins'', this world is very real. But let us keep the philosophical schools aside. What do you feel? What do I feel? If I feel this world is unreal, I would not be talking to you, taking the classes. I feel that I must spend my time, and you must also. I want you also to spend your time with me, or otherwise, I will be very unhappy. So, to make me happy, you have to attend the classes. So, the world is very, very real. Now, what is the problem with this view? The view is, I already mentioned, that happiness is changing into unhappiness. Manifestation is changing into un-manifestation, and everything is changing in this world, and there is no certainty. That means there is no security. That feeling of non-security is the greatest ''dukkha'' anybody can have.

So, we want to think that why did God create this world? According to ''Advaita'', God never created. Then why are we seeing it? According to ''Advaita'', it is seeming. It is appearance only. It is mere appearance, like mistaking a rope for a snake. But I am not going into it. I am coming. What Gaudapada and also Shankara, many other people do exactly the same thing. Maybe not in such harsh words, but in milder words. What is it? This is where ''Karma Siddhanta'' comes.

In this world, what is ''Karma Siddhanta''? All of us have done ''karma''. All human beings, non-human beings, they are evolving. That is part of the ''Karma Siddhanta.'' They have not done any ''karma, Purva Janma karma. Purva Jan''ma is there. ''Karmaphala'' is not there. These are very important points. All non-human beings, that means even human beings who are not grown up, who do not know to feel, "I am doing," that is ''ahamkara bhava'', who are mad, who are sleeping, who are suffering from certain diseases, they cannot be held responsible. So, ''Karma Siddhanta'' works only. What is ''Karma Siddhanta''? Accepting ''Karmaphala'', the result of actions that we have done, both in the past lives, especially in the last life, and in this life also. So, this is what ''Karma Siddhanta'' means, what we are. And then, another important factor is we are not bothered about what anybody else thinks. I am only bothered by what is my conviction.

What is my conviction? I wish a lot for myself. I am not able to get. It makes me very unhappy. So, why did God create? If you study ''Advaita'', the answer is God did not create. What is the second option, then? Did the world create by itself? Impossible because something cannot create itself. It is impossible. It is illogical. Then what is the third? That I must have, each one of us must have created ourselves. Let us confine ourselves only to one individual. Let us say, this is me. I have this problem. I am not happy. I want to be happy. Why am I unhappy? Because of what I have done in the past. So, what comes? I have done something, and what did I do? ''Karma''. What type of ''Karma? Papa Karma'' because unhappiness is the result of ''Papa Karma.'' Happiness is the result of ''Punya Karma''. So, I have got this, I have done this, what is called ''Papa Karma.'' How was I able to do ''Punyam'' or ''Papa Karma?'' Definitely, I have done some ''Punya Karma;'' otherwise, I would have been listening like you are listening to my class. So, how did I do? Simply, one cannot do anything without an instrument. So, I had an instrument. What was that instrument? My body-mind complex in the one.

Now, there is a big problem with it. So, I had a body, and I had a mind, and I had some knowledge, and I thought I was very clever, and I thought I could escape ''Karmaphala''. I did something good. I did something also wrong, and as a result, as a mixture of that, I have been born in this birth, in this life, in this way. What is the problem with this? The problem is that I have created everything. It has tremendous implications. If somebody is giving me trouble, it is because of what I did. If somebody is loving me, helping me, adoring me, looking after me, that is also the result of my ''Punya Karma''. So, I have done both ''Punyam'' and ''Papa''m. How did I do it? Through the body. Now, just think for a second. Pause and think. How did that body come? Did it fall down from the sky? Was it eternally there? That is the problem. So, how did that last birth come about? Because of previous births', ''Karmaphala,'' and that last series, the third birth which created the last birth, which created this birth, that third ''Janma'' through which I have done ''Karma'', which resulted in my last birth. How did I get that? Because of its birth. So, where does it begin? It is called ''Anadi''. So, which is first, seed or tree, egg or chicken? Nobody can give a logical answer for that. So, this is where ''Purva Mimamsaka'' says that because of ''Purva Janma Punya'' or ''Papa Karma'', we are like this in this world. So, what is the ''Tatparya,'' essence, summary? Because of the body was created, a particular body with some good things, some not so positive things, because of ''Purva Janma Karma''. And then what made me do that ''Purva Janma Karma''? Body. So, which is first? Body or ''Karma''? This is what Gaudapada wants to address from the 14th to the 23rd. This is the view of the ''Mimamsakas''. 

So, what is the solution to this problem? Gaudapada says, 'Whatever has happened, let us not dwell on it too deeply. But our scriptures tell us to do this and not to do that.' What does scripture itself mean? That is ''Vidhi'' and ''Nishedha''. 'Do this and don't do this.' If we follow these scriptures, what happens? The ''Karmaphala'' will go away. If we perform ''Nitya Karma, Naividya Karma'', etc., then whatever we have accumulated will disappear. Further accumulation will not occur, and that ''Karmaphala'' will be completely nullified, exhausted, and there will be no further birth. That is the idea of ''Moksha'' according to the ''Mimamsakas.'' And this is the view from the 14th to the 23rd. Gaudapada brings in six objections. But if we accept. Accept what? Accept that ''Srishti'' (creation) is real, this world is real, and my body-mind is real, your body-mind is real. Remember, ''Karmaphala'' cannot be accepted directly; it is accepted through some other factors, either living or non-living. If you are living in a very cold place, you have done some ''Papakarma.'' If you are living in a very hot place, that is also the result of ''Papakarma''. But if you are living in cities like Athens, which are like Bangalore, air-conditioned places, then you have earned great ''Punya'' in that respect, remember. So, accepting creation as a reality has consequences, according to the ''Mimamsakas: Janma'' (birth) and ''Karmaphala'' (the results of actions). ''Sharira'' (body) and ''Karmaphala'' are what he is talking about. ''Hetu'' means ''Karma'', which is the cause of the body, and ''Phala'' means the body, the result of ''Karma''. Good body, bad body, blind body, healthy body, extraordinarily great scientist, musician, or the greatest evil person, etc. So, this is the problem.

Before I proceed further, I also want to mention something. If ''Ishwara'' or ''Brahman'' as ''Ishwara'' (because creation can only come through ''Ishwara'' or ''Saguna Brahma'') is accepted, then the problem is that we observe so much differentiation: suffering individuals, enjoying individuals, good individuals, evil individuals, rich individuals, poor individuals. So, can we accept that ''Ishwara,'' not ''Brahman'' but ''Ishwara'', created this world? If we accept that view, the problem is that ''Ishwara'' must be very partial. Some people receive good ''Karma'', while others receive bad bodies and bad circumstances. So, ''Ishwara'' seems to have a partial and biased mind. He appears to love some and hate others. If ''Ishwara'' loves and hates, he is no better than the worst human beings in this world. So, what is the answer? Our own ''Karmaphala.'' Ultimately, ''Janma'' (birth) or the body gives rise to ''Karma. Karma'' gives birth to the body. This is the crux of the matter. So, what are the six things that Gaudapada wants to understand? The first four are quite simple.

What is the first theory? Let us accept that ''Karma'' is the cause, the real cause of this body, which represents the entire creation. ''Karma'' first. What is the problem? Okay, let us now enumerate them before proceeding. What is the second theory? No, no, no. ''Karma'' is not the cause; the body is the cause. Because without the body, how can you perform ''Karma''? This is the second theory. The third theory is that it's not just ''Karma'' alone or the body alone; both the body and ''Karma'' originate simultaneously and are the causes of this world, ''Srishti,'' our own ''Srishti.'' Now, the question arises, which is the cause and which is the effect? Because in this world, whatever we see, we see cause and effect. So, if ''Karma'' is the cause, is the body the effect, or is the body the cause and ''Karma'' the effect? This is the fourth problem. But even that is not the end. What is the fifth idea? No, don't ask questions like which is first and which is second. ''Karma'' and ''Sharira'' are part of a long series that is ''Anadi'', meaning we don't know how it started, and it is beginningless. That means we can never trace it. Suppose it's a series; that's the fifth problem. Then, the sixth problem is that this ''Karma'' and ''Sharira'' series are both ''Anadi'', both beginningless, because nobody can find out their origins. These are the six problems.

Now, one by one, we will address them. It's actually straightforward. Suppose we say ''Karma'' is the original cause of this creation, which means my body-mind, your body-mind, etc. This is not acceptable because our specific bodies differ from each other, and we undergo various experiences due to ''Punyam'' or ''Papam'', depending on ''Dharma'' and ''Adharma'' in our past life. So, it cannot be accepted that ''Karma'' is the original cause. Then, what is the second option? Now, there is a body, so it has done ''Karma''. So, the body is the cause, and ''Karma'' is the effect. This also cannot be accepted because how did that particular body, which behaves differently from every other body, create that specific ''Karma''? There must be some old habits, and who gave those habits? ''Samskara''s from previous ''Karmaphala.'' This is the second option. The third option, where both ''Karma'' and ''Sharira'' originate simultaneously, is not valid because ''Sharira'' cannot originate without ''Karma'', and ''Karma'' cannot be performed without ''Sharira''. Both of them originating simultaneously cannot explain the cause-effect relationship." We are discussing ''Karyakarana Sambandha.'' What is the fourth option? That ''karma'' comes from ''Shariram'', and ''Shariram'' comes from ''karma''. But when did it start? Because mutually, both cannot be the cause and effect. Gaudapada gives a beautiful answer, like Shankaracharya, that Rama is the effect, Dasaratha is the father, Rama is the son, and who is the cause of Dasaratha? Rama. So, the son is the cause of the father, and the father is the cause of the son. Do you think that is correct? The cause cannot be without its previous effect, and that effect cannot be without the previous cause. So, this fourth option, that both are mutually both cause as well as effect, can never be accepted.

Now, what is the fifth formulation? The body has come out of ''karma,'' and ''karma'' because of its previous body, and that previous body because of the previous ''karm''a. So, what happens? ''Karma'' produces the body, the body produces ''karma, karma'' produces the body, and the body produces... what is the point? That five ''janmas'' back, I had a body that created ''karma'', and the fourth ''janma'' is the result of that ''karm''a done in the fifth ''janma'', the last fifth ''janma'', and the fourth ''janma'' creates the third ''janma'', the third ''janma'' creates the second ''janma'', the second ''janma'' created this present ''janma.'' That means you can never find out which is earlier and which is later. So, this is called the fallacy of a mutual, at the same time, cause and effect relationship, and this can never be logically accepted.

So, this formulation Gaudapada says cannot be accepted because, in this particular case, we end up in infinite regress. Where did you come from? From my father. Where did the father come from? From his father. Where did his father come from? From his father. So, I am the effect, my father is the cause, and my father is the effect, and his father is the cause. Where do we end up? This is called infinite regress, and infinite regress is not going to solve the problem because we can never find the ''moola karana'', the original cause, and unless we find the original cause, we cannot obtain ''Moksha''. That is the whole point.

Then what is the sixth formulation? No, no, we can never find out. It is a series. This is called a series, and then what is this series? The series is called that when we cannot get to the original cause, it is a beginning-less series. This beginning-less series, ''karma'' is the ''karana,'' but ''karma'' is the effect of the previous one. So this series goes on. We call it a series.

Then we cannot accept ''karma'' as the cause, ''karana'' as the cause. The word series is a nonsensical concept because only when we accept cause and effect, a series will be possible. Then, supposing there is a cricket match, a series of cricket matches are there. So, the first match, some result will come. The second match, some other result will come. So gradual reduction of many, elimination of many people, etc., etc. This is called a series of cricket matches. We are all familiar with that, and that series is possible only because there will be two types of people and the opponents playing against each other. Here, the players are ''karma'' and ''sharira'', and without ''karma'' and ''sharira,'' then you cannot understand what is the ''moola karana''. The very concept of a series, an ongoing series, is nonsense. We know that any series has a beginning, but according to the ''Mimamsaka'' view, it is impossible to get.

Then there is a last fallacy that Gaudapada squashes, eliminates all these ''Mimamsaka''<nowiki/>'s views. What is it? Sir, you are talking about the creation of this world. ''Mimamsaka''<nowiki/>'s are talking, all the points we are talking about are because of accepting the fact there is a creation, there is a world, there is ''karma'', and there is my body, your body, and there is an experience of ''papa'' and ''punya'' in the form of suffering and enjoyment as if this world is very real. So, what is Gaudapada's, sir? If this creation is real, getting ''moksha'' will never be possible. This is called ''Aneer Moksha Prasangha''. With this, I will end. I will just explain, and if necessary, I will take it up in the future classes also if necessary.

What is it? If this world is real, ''karma'' and ''janma'' are real, then what happens? Supposing with great difficulty you put an end to ''samsara''. So, ''samsara'' stops tomorrow at 12 o'clock, and your ''moksha'' will start. When? Tomorrow 1 second past 12, your ''moksha'' will start. What is the problem? The problem is whatever has a beginning has an end. So, if this ''moksha'', what you call getting out of ''samsara'', starts at 1 minute past 12 o'clock tomorrow, it is not going to last because it is illogical to say something has an ''adi'' or beginning but it will come to an end. That which is ''anadi'' will never come to an end, and that which is a beginning must always have an end because the very word beginning, like if you say white, you have to think about black. If you say good, you have to think about evil. If you say beginning, you have to think about end. These are logical fallacies.

So, these are the six problems with the ''Mimamsaka''<nowiki/>'s understanding of this creation. What is the essence of all this? That if creation is real, there is no ''mukti''. Then we see it. Then what? What do we call it? That is ''Veda'' is telling because you are mistaken, and even to understand that you are mistaken, even if you are psychologically mad, to cure you, no psychiatrist can cure a madcap unless he brings the intelligence of the madcap to a certain state where he understands that my thinking is wrong, my thinking that I am mad is completely wrong, but I have become habituated. Can I get out of this habit? Yes, a psychiatrist can help.

So, until the patient comes to understand he never was mad, madness started at some point in time, and therefore, madness must end at some point in time in this life or the next life. So, I am born, that is madness. That is called ''mithya'', and when I start understanding I was never born, I will never be born, I cannot be born, I was always ''Brahman'', that is the point Gaudapada wants to drive into our small brains. With this, I will stop.
[[Category:Mandukya Karika]]