some thoughts on the mind - 2

[Guest guest]

namaste.

 

[The background for this series of posts on the mind is: I volunteered

to address our local discussion group on this topic, specifically,

vedantic explanation of the functioning of the mind. As a prelude to

that, I am posting it here with the hope that the learned members

give me suggestions for an improved product of presentation.]

 

 

It was stated in the earlier post that mind (the manas) is made up

of the food we eat and that manas is an important requisite for knowledge.

For an intense seeker of truth, knowledge how the mind functions may be

immaterial. Further, this knowledge which the mind is so requisite in

acquiring is only the lower knowledge (classification of knowledge into

upper and lower as per MuNDAka upanishad, 1.1.4). Also, neither the sense

organs by themselves, nor the sense organs in conjunction with the manas

are by themselves sufficient. As Kena upanishad puts so beautifully (1.2

to 1.9), it is the Self behind the sense organs that makes the eyes to

see, the ears to hear and the manas to function.

 

There are beautiful parables on the manas in the upanishads. ChAndogya

upanishad (6.8.2) says: The mind, like a bird bound to a string, is bound

to the soul. It flies in all directions and failing to get a resting place

anywhere else, returns to the place of bondage. Thus, the mind is bound to

the soul. The Katha upanishad, in the chariot analogy (1.3.3 to 1.3.5),

equates the manas to the reins. Under control of a good chariot driver

(buddhi), the manas (the reins) control the sense organs (the horses).

The same chariot analogy appears in the BhagavadgItA also.

 

Brahman and Atman are one. Atman, when it becomes limited by the upAdhis,

is known as the individual jeeva who is the knower and to whom knowledge

is supplied by the sense organs and the manas. The distinction of the

knower, the knowledge and the process of knowledge are not there for

the Atman, but is there for the jeeva. Shri Shankara in

BrahmasutrAbhAshhya (BSB)(II.3.40 and also adhyAsabhAshhya) points to

the illogicity of superimposition (of subject and object) and further

says it is still done in spite of it being illogical. Shri Shankara

says that all instruments of knowledge (including buddhi and manas)

are limiting upAdhis on the Atman.

 

The principal upAdhi superimposed on the Atman is the antahkaraNa,

the internal organ of knowledge (BSB II.3.32). This is known in

different contexts by different forms, depending on the function.

The various forms of antahkaraNa are manas (mind), buddhi (intellect),

citta (thought) etc. AntahkaraNa is called manas when it is in a state

of doubt (samsayAdi vr^ttikam manaityucyate BSB II.3.32) and it is

called buddhi while it is in a state of determination (nishcayAdi

vr^ttikam buddhvitih BSB II.3.32). By whatever name it is known,

Shri Shankara argues that such an internal organ of knowledge is an

essential necessity. Shri Shankara's reasoning is: If the Atman (in

its limited state, limited by the upAdhis, I use the word soul here to

refer to this state), sense-organs and the objects alone were enough

for perception, then there would be perpetual perception since the soul

is eternal and the sense-organs and the objects are always interacting.

If these three (the soul, sense-organs and the object) are not sufficient

for perception to take place, no perception would occur, even if these

three are present always. For perception to take place, we need, in

addition to these three, an internal sense-organ "through whose

attention and non-attention, perception and non-perception take place"

(BSB II.3.32, Thibaut). Shri Shankara uses Br^hadAraNyaka upanishad

(1.5.3) in support of the above argument. Br^hadAraNyaka 1.5.3 says

"my mind was not paying attention, hence I did not hear, etc.."

i.e. one hears with the mind, sees with the mind. That is, all

empirical experience, experience of this jagat is because of

antahkaraNa.

 

Manas is minute (BSB II.4.7). It is subtle and limited in size,

because at death when the manas leaves the physical body, it is

not perceived. If it were big, it should be capable of being

perceived. Further, manas or buddhi are not the agents of

knowledge, but only instruments of knowledge. That is, they are

never kartA.

 

To conclude this section, manas is material and subtle and is an

instrument (of knowledge) of the soul, or of the lower self. Manas

is the central functionary on which the five karmendriyAs (organs

of action) and the five jnAnendriyAs (organs of knowledge) are

dependent. These eleven make for the whole conscious life of the

individual. My reading of BSB II.4.17 says that Shri Shankara

considers manas also as a sense organ.

 

I like to touch on in my next post how manas acquires the perceptual

knowledge (for use by the agent, the kartA) by means of the sense organs.

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

------