Basic HTML Version
PART
TWO 15'
[NcrrEs-1. You know little—When
we speak of
knowing something well, we mean a clear and defined
knowledge of it in an objective sense, say, as when we
have a sensuous or intellectual perception. A clear
knowledge of Brahman in this sense is tantamount to
practical ignorance of it. Why it is so is next explained.
2.
For etc.—From
the explanation of Brahman
given in the last Part, a person yet in ignorance is likely
to mistake the Atman for the ego or sense of individuality;
for the ignorant man cannot see further than that
Similarly with regard to the ego expressing in the deities.
So the clear knowledge of Brahman that an ignorant man
may have in mind is, at the most, an idea of the ego, or
more often even grosser aspects of personality, human
and superhuman. Hence such knowledge is a trifle. It
should not, however, be understood from this that the
Upanisad inculcates the doctrine that Brahman is an
unknown and unknowable entity. What is contended
here is that as long as one is in ignorance, any entity
perceived as an object, whether by the senses or thought,
cannot be equated with Brahman. For Brahman is the
eternal Subject, the 'seer' behind every form of perception,
and the 'seer' can never be the seen. Hence Brahman is
unknown and unknowable in the objective sense, but it
is
more
than the known when intuited as one's central
being—the Self or the Atman.