kathopanishad-2-3-12-naiva vācā

Commentary by Swami Krishnananda of the great Divine Life Society

Naiva vācā na manasā prāptuṁ śakyo na cakṣuṣā, astīti bruvato’nyatra kathaṁ tad upalabhyate (2.3.12). Neither by speech nor by mind nor by perception through the eyes can this be known. Any amount of listening will not suffice. Any amount of mere thinking will not suffice. And touring, looking at all things the whole world over, will also not be adequate. We will not see God anywhere by any amount of thinking. We can travel from one corner of the earth to another corner of the earth, but we will not see God. From the Himalayas to Kanyakumari we can travel, and we will not see God anywhere. Then where is God? We go on thinking, but nothing comes out of it. And we go on listening; then also, nothing comes out of it. What do we do now? Astīti bruvato’nyatra kathaṁ tad upalabhyate: It is to be accepted as Pure Existence. Astīti: That which Is, is God. It is not in the Himalayas, it is not in Kanyakumari; it is That which Is.

In the Panchadasi there is a chapter on this is-ness, or the existence of things. Generally we say a building exists, a chair exists, a table exists. We convert the term ‘exists’ as a predicate or a verb to be tagged on to the subject, which is the building, which is the chair, which is the table or anything, under the wrong impression that existence is an attribute of the chair or the table or the building or whatever it is, the fact being quite the reverse. Existence is first. The form of the building or the chair or the table, or anything, is secondary. There cannot be a chair unless existence is there prior to it. So why do we consider existence as a predicate? Why should we use ‘existence’ as a verb that follows a noun? The noun is non-existent practically, minus that verb which indicates the prior existence of the reality behind even the noun. So it is existence first, and chairhood afterwards. But we always say that the chair exists, as if existence is the quality of the chair. It is the other way around; the chair is the quality of existence. The chairhood, the buildinghood, etc., are qualifications, name-and-form complexes growing externally on existence as an accretion. Existence is Truth. So you exist, I exist, this exists, that exists. There is a general existence of everything. If we can boil down all the forms and names, the shapes and contours, the differentiations and relations—all these diversifications which are the creations of the perceptions of the sense organs—boil them down to the basic substratum or the menstruum of pure Existence, we will find there is one uniform continuum of the existence of everything, without any distinction of one thing from the other thing.

How do we conceive God? As pure Existence only. There is no other way. By our senses, by our seeing, by our hearing, by our speaking, by our thinking aloud and logically arguing, nothing will come out, because existence is not an object of any of these activities of the faculties. It is beyond them. Existence is prior to every activity of the human faculty. Therefore, no one can know this by the attempts of the available faculties such as speech, mind, eyes, etc.

Astīti bruvato’nyatra kathaṁ tad upalabhyate: How can we know it except as that which just is, pure Being, pure Be-ness? ‘Being’ is also an inadequate word because it suggests some continuity of process. It is be-ness, as people sometimes say. I just be. So many words have been used by philosophers to come nearest to the definition of this Truth, and words fail always. That which Is: astīti bruvato’nyatra kathaṁ tad upalabhyate.