Rishikas existed alongside Rishis in the Vedic ages and were many a time, more popular than their male counterparts.
Gargi Vachaknavi (born around c. 700 BCE) was named after father sage Vachaknu and was a renowned philosopher from ancient India.
She is even honoured in Vedic literature as not only an active supporter of the Vedas but someone who is naturally a great philosopher and was even granted the title of Brahmavadini which means someone with knowledge Brahma Vidya.
From a young age, she had shown a deep interest in Vedic scriptures and soon enough became an expert in fields of philosophy. Her knowledge of the Vedas and Upanishads was rivaled by few at the time.
Gargi Vachaknavi (born around c. 700 BCE) was named after father sage Vachaknu and was a renowned philosopher from ancient India.
She is even honoured in Vedic literature as not only an active supporter of the Vedas but someone who is naturally a great philosopher and was even granted the title of Brahmavadini which means someone with knowledge Brahma Vidya.
From a young age, she had shown a deep interest in Vedic scriptures and soon enough became an expert in fields of philosophy. Her knowledge of the Vedas and Upanishads was rivaled by few at the time.
King Janaka of Videha kingdom held a Rajasuya Yagna where he invited all learned scholars of his time. The Yagna was a magnanimous one with over-the-top arrangements. Janaka, being a learned man himself, thought of selecting a scholar from the assembled group of elite scholars who would have the most in-depth knowledge about Brahman and was thus the most accomplished.
In order to carry out the selection, he planned to offer 1,000 cows with each cow’s horns dangling with about 10 grams of solid gold as a prize.
Amongst these scholars were our very own Gargi Vachaknavi and another noted sage named Yajnavalkya. Yajnavalkya, self-assured in his supremacy, ordered his disciple to take the cow herd to his house since there was no other scholar who could beat him. This resulted in other scholars getting angry at being denied a fair chance at the prize.
Most of the scholars were unsure of their knowledge, however, there were eight distinguished sages who did challenge him to a debate, of which Gargi was one of the challengers and perhaps the only woman among the group of learned scholars.
Sages like Asvala, Artabhaga, Bhujyu, Ushasta contested with him and lost as Yajnavalkya was able to provide satisfactory answers to all of their questions
Gargi then questioned Yajnavalkya on his claim of superiority among the scholars. Her initial dialogue with Yajnavalkya bordered on being quite metaphysical but she eventually change her course and asked him specific questions related to the environment existing in the world, the question of the very origin of all existence and more.
It is not clear who won the debate. Some sources say that Gargi acknowledged Yajnavalkya’s greatness but such an ending could very well be manipulated.
Gargi was honoured as one of the Navratnas in the court of King Janaka of Mithila. Her philosophical views are mentioned in the Chandoga Upanishads and she has made significant contributions to the construction of the Rig Veda.
She took on the great Rishi Yajnavalkya at the great debate organised by King Janaka in Videha. The debate too place in the court of King Janaka. Yajnavalkya received questions from all learned sages and seers assembled there, and he kept offering answers to all of them.
Among them was Rishi Gargi. Addressing the assembly, she said, “Revered Brahmins, I shall ask Yajnavalkya two questions. If he is able to answer them, no one among you can ever defeat him. He will be the great expounder of the truth of Brahman.”
Yajnavalkya said, “Ask, O Gargi.” Gargi said, “Yajnavalkya, that which they say is above heaven and below the earth, which is between heaven and earth as well, and which was, is, and shall be – tell me, in what is it woven, warp and woof?’
Yajnavalkya said, “That of which they say, O Gargi, that it is above heaven and below the earth, which is between heaven and earth as well, and which was, is, and shall be–that is woven, warp and woof, is the ether. “Ether (_Akasha_) is the subtlest element. So subtle that it is often indistinguishable from Consciousness. Without it nothing can exist. Yet there is more”.
Gargi said, “Thou hast answered my first question. I bow to thee, O Yajnavalkya. Be ready now to answer my second question.” Yajnavalkya said, “Ask, O Gargi.”
Gargi said, “In whom is that ether woven, warp and woof?” Yajnavalkya replied, “The seers, O Gargi, call him _Akshara_ – the Immutable and Imperishable Reality.
He is neither gross nor fine, neither short nor long, neither hot nor cold, neither light nor dark, neither of the nature of air, nor of the nature of ether. He is without relations. He is without taste or smell, without eyes, ears, speech, mind, vigor, breath, mouth. He is without measure; he is without inside or outside. He enjoys nothing; nothing enjoys him.’ “At the command of that Reality, O Gargi, the sun and moon hold their courses; heaven and earth keep their positions; moments, hours, days and nights, fortnights and months, seasons and years–all follow their paths; rivers issuing from the snowy mountains flow on, some eastward, some westward, others in other directions.’ “He, O Gargi, who in this world, without knowing this Reality, offers oblations, performs sacrifices, practices austerities, even though for many thousands of years, gains little: his offerings and practices are perishable. He, O Gargi, who departs this life without knowing the Imperishable, is pitiable. But he, O Gargi, who departs this life knowing this, is wise.” “This Reality, O Gargi, is unseen but is the seer, is unheard but is the hearer, is unthinkable but is the thinker, is unknown but is the knower. There is no seer but he, there is no hearer but he, there is no thinker but he, there is no knower but he. In Akshara, verily, O Gargi, the ether is woven, warp and woof.”
Hearing these words from Yajnavalkya, Gargi again looked at the assembled Brahmins and said, “Revered Brahmins, well may you feel blessed if you get off with bowing before him! No one will defeat Yajnavalkya, expounder of the truth of Brahman.”
“This Immutable, O Gargi, is never seen but is the Witness; It is never heard, but is the Hearer; It is never thought, but is the Thinker; It is never known, but is the Knower. There is no other witness but This, no other hearer but This, no other thinker but This, no other knower but This. By this Immutable, O Gargi, is the (unmanifested) ether pervaded.”
Thus, in the light of the non-dual nature of Brahman, there is only ever one Witness – the Real Self, or Atman, which is itself identical to Brahman. Existing beyond the limitations of attributes and distinctions, it is unable to be seen, heard, thought of, or known. The very act of seeing, hearing, thinking, or knowing implies a separation – an object which may be seen, heard, thought of, or known. What Yajnavalkya is suggesting here is that the awareness of Brahman removes the dualism of the Witness and the witnessed, after which realisation only the Witness itself remains. Or, to use a famous phrase from the 20th century philosopher, Jiddu Krishnamurti, it is the realisation that: “the observer is the observed”.
The verse therefore suggests that Brahman cannot be an object of knowledge, as the objectification process itself implies duality – the separation of the observer from some other thing. Brahman should not be thought of as something that can be seen or experienced external to one’s self, rather Brahman can only be experienced in the realisation of one’s fundamental identity with it. By treating Brahman as an object of knowledge – and even in the discussion of Brahman as a concept – it becomes as a separate entity or phenomenon, and thus a duality arises. This can only be counteracted by the method of “neti neti” – the denial of attributes.
So Gargi was instrumental in expounding the Vedic notion of Atman and Brahman. She held her own amongst the leading Rishis of her time and won the praise of Yajnavalkya , the author of the Brihardaranayaka Upanishad.
Among them was Rishi Gargi. Addressing the assembly, she said, “Revered Brahmins, I shall ask Yajnavalkya two questions. If he is able to answer them, no one among you can ever defeat him. He will be the great expounder of the truth of Brahman.”
Yajnavalkya said, “Ask, O Gargi.” Gargi said, “Yajnavalkya, that which they say is above heaven and below the earth, which is between heaven and earth as well, and which was, is, and shall be – tell me, in what is it woven, warp and woof?’
Yajnavalkya said, “That of which they say, O Gargi, that it is above heaven and below the earth, which is between heaven and earth as well, and which was, is, and shall be–that is woven, warp and woof, is the ether. “Ether (_Akasha_) is the subtlest element. So subtle that it is often indistinguishable from Consciousness. Without it nothing can exist. Yet there is more”.
Gargi said, “Thou hast answered my first question. I bow to thee, O Yajnavalkya. Be ready now to answer my second question.” Yajnavalkya said, “Ask, O Gargi.”
Gargi said, “In whom is that ether woven, warp and woof?” Yajnavalkya replied, “The seers, O Gargi, call him _Akshara_ – the Immutable and Imperishable Reality.
He is neither gross nor fine, neither short nor long, neither hot nor cold, neither light nor dark, neither of the nature of air, nor of the nature of ether. He is without relations. He is without taste or smell, without eyes, ears, speech, mind, vigor, breath, mouth. He is without measure; he is without inside or outside. He enjoys nothing; nothing enjoys him.’ “At the command of that Reality, O Gargi, the sun and moon hold their courses; heaven and earth keep their positions; moments, hours, days and nights, fortnights and months, seasons and years–all follow their paths; rivers issuing from the snowy mountains flow on, some eastward, some westward, others in other directions.’ “He, O Gargi, who in this world, without knowing this Reality, offers oblations, performs sacrifices, practices austerities, even though for many thousands of years, gains little: his offerings and practices are perishable. He, O Gargi, who departs this life without knowing the Imperishable, is pitiable. But he, O Gargi, who departs this life knowing this, is wise.” “This Reality, O Gargi, is unseen but is the seer, is unheard but is the hearer, is unthinkable but is the thinker, is unknown but is the knower. There is no seer but he, there is no hearer but he, there is no thinker but he, there is no knower but he. In Akshara, verily, O Gargi, the ether is woven, warp and woof.”
Hearing these words from Yajnavalkya, Gargi again looked at the assembled Brahmins and said, “Revered Brahmins, well may you feel blessed if you get off with bowing before him! No one will defeat Yajnavalkya, expounder of the truth of Brahman.”
“This Immutable, O Gargi, is never seen but is the Witness; It is never heard, but is the Hearer; It is never thought, but is the Thinker; It is never known, but is the Knower. There is no other witness but This, no other hearer but This, no other thinker but This, no other knower but This. By this Immutable, O Gargi, is the (unmanifested) ether pervaded.”
Thus, in the light of the non-dual nature of Brahman, there is only ever one Witness – the Real Self, or Atman, which is itself identical to Brahman. Existing beyond the limitations of attributes and distinctions, it is unable to be seen, heard, thought of, or known. The very act of seeing, hearing, thinking, or knowing implies a separation – an object which may be seen, heard, thought of, or known. What Yajnavalkya is suggesting here is that the awareness of Brahman removes the dualism of the Witness and the witnessed, after which realisation only the Witness itself remains. Or, to use a famous phrase from the 20th century philosopher, Jiddu Krishnamurti, it is the realisation that: “the observer is the observed”.
The verse therefore suggests that Brahman cannot be an object of knowledge, as the objectification process itself implies duality – the separation of the observer from some other thing. Brahman should not be thought of as something that can be seen or experienced external to one’s self, rather Brahman can only be experienced in the realisation of one’s fundamental identity with it. By treating Brahman as an object of knowledge – and even in the discussion of Brahman as a concept – it becomes as a separate entity or phenomenon, and thus a duality arises. This can only be counteracted by the method of “neti neti” – the denial of attributes.
So Gargi was instrumental in expounding the Vedic notion of Atman and Brahman. She held her own amongst the leading Rishis of her time and won the praise of Yajnavalkya , the author of the Brihardaranayaka Upanishad.
No comments:
Post a Comment