sakshi consciousness

[Guest guest]

Namaste, It is a trivial fact of material life that my awareness or

knowledge at any given time is different from that of others. I know

what I know and you know what you know. So the question is - Who is

the knower ? It is said that absolute consciousness is not aware of

any object and it is reflected consciousness or chidabhasa that is the

cause of ego,intellect,mind and prana in the body. Is that a correct

statement ? Now let us consider the sakshi, updrashta, anumanta,

kshetragya of Bhagavad Gita. If all these are used for Atman, then

isn't Atman the knower or consciousness that 'knows' about

objects/material world etc ? I am confused. Perhaps it just means that

the sakshi/kshetragya is unobjectifiable and different from the

reflected consciousness ?

 

thanks,

Om Namah Sivaya

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "mahadevadvaita"

<mahadevadvaita wrote:

>

> Namaste, It is a trivial fact of material life that my awareness

or

> knowledge at any given time is different from that of others. I

know

> what I know and you know what you know. So the question is - Who

is

> the knower ? It is said that absolute consciousness is not aware

of

> any object and it is reflected consciousness or chidabhasa that is

the

> cause of ego,intellect,mind and prana in the body. Is that a

correct

> statement ? Now let us consider the sakshi, updrashta, anumanta,

> kshetragya of Bhagavad Gita. If all these are used for Atman, then

> isn't Atman the knower or consciousness that 'knows' about

> objects/material world etc ? I am confused. Perhaps it just means

that

> the sakshi/kshetragya is unobjectifiable and different from the

> reflected consciousness ?

>

 

 

Namaste

 

Shri Mahadevadvaita writes

 

"It is a trivial fact of material life that my awareness or

knowledge at any given time is different from that of others. I know

what I know and you know what you know. So the question is - Who is

the knower ? It is said that absolute consciousness is not aware of

any object and it is reflected consciousness or chidabhasa that is

the

cause of ego,intellect,mind and prana in the body. Is that a correct

statement ? Now let us consider the sakshi, updrashta, anumanta,

kshetragya of Bhagavad Gita. If all these are used for Atman, then

isn't Atman the knower or consciousness that 'knows' about

objects/material world etc ? I am confused. Perhaps it just means

that

the sakshi/kshetragya is unobjectifiable and different from the

reflected consciousness ?"

 

The key questions in the above are:

1. Who is the knower?

2. Who is the Kshhetrajna?

3. Who is the Witness (SaakshhI)?

 

And I am adding the following question, for completeness:

4. Who is the doer-experiencer?

 

And I am now rearranging the questions as follows to indicate

already the answers (to be elaborated below):

 

1. Who is the knower-doer-experiencer?

2. Who is the Kshetrajna?

3. Who is the `all-knowing' Saakshii Consciousness?

 

My explanations below borrow a good deal from Panchadashi and also

from Aurobindo. So in that sense I may appear to deviate from

Shankara.

I present these explanations in two parts.

 

Part -1

 

There is a seemingly endless play of the sentient Consciousness

within and the insentient universe of matter outside through the

medium of the BMI. This is the Knot (cit-jaDa-granthi) between the

sentient and the insentient that Ramana Maharshi talks about. The

sentient Consciousness is the Purushha. Everything else, including

the interaction with other beings, is PrakRti. The interplay of Self

and PrakRti is what constitutes our passage through life.

 

But there are two purushhas. (Gita XV – 16) – kshhara-purushha (the

perishable Self) and the akshhara-purushha (the imperishable Self).

The kshhara is the familiar JIva. It is expressing itself through

the BMI. But in so expressing itself, it invariably makes the

mistake of thinking it is just BMI and nothing more. In other words,

the kshhara-purushha commits the colossal error of identifying

itself with the BMI. This colossal error is called `anAdi avidyA'

(Beginningless Ignorance). And here starts all the problems of life.

All the pleasure and pain, ups and downs, light and darkness, good

and bad, that the BMI suffers through, are mistakenly assumed by the

kshhara-purushha as its own experiences. Not only this. All the

actions of the BMI are also appropriated by the kshhara. Thus arises

the common expressions: `I am the doer (kartA)' and `I am the

experiencer (bhoktA)'.

 

The kshara purushha is involved in the actions of Nature. He

reflects the varied workings of the Gunas of prakRti. He is saguNa,

personal. He associates himself with the doings of prakRti and

thinks he is the doer. He identifies himself with the play of

personality and clouds his self-knowledge with the ego-sense in

PrakRti so that he thinks himself as the ego-doer of works. (III -

27):

 

Some one pinches my body. It hurts. Who feels this hurt? I feel the

hurt. Who is this I that is speaking? It is the kshhara-purushha.

Why does the kshhara-purushha feel the hurt? Because it has

identified itself with the BMI. Therefore it becomes the `bhoktA'

the experiencer.

 

Not only do I feel the hurt, but I flare up at the other person. Who

is this I that is flaring up now? It is again the kshhara-purushha.

Why does the kshhara-purushha flare up? Because it has identified

itself with the BMI. As a consequence of this identification, it not

only experiences the hurt, but falls into the trap of the krodha

(anger) and ahamkAra (ego) and flares back. So it becomes

the `kartA' (doer).

 

What does the Lord say on this now? He says there are two purushhas –

kshhara and akshhara. The akshhara is never hurt and can never be

hurt, says He. (II – 24)."This cannot be cut into pieces; this

cannot be burnt; this cannot be tainted; this cannot be dried".

 

So He says: "My dear Arjuna, You (the kshhara-purushha / JIva) are

wrongly identifying yourself with this BMI. Don't do this. Identify

yourself with the akshhara-purushha within you. Then there will be

no hurt. Only Happiness"

 

This is the bottom line. This is the essential philosophical content

of the entire teaching of the Gita. This is the message of all

spiritual teaching. This is the grand recipe for Happiness.

 

All forms and qualities, changes and modifications belong to the

realm of matter. Atman or Brahman is the changeless substratum in

the presence of which this interplay takes place. The movie screen

is the only basic presence and inherent reality whereon all the

turmoil and turbulence of the actions of the movie take place. The

screen by itself is untainted by any of that action. The purushha by

himself has no samsAra. But when He identifies himself with the

body and the senses which are the effects of prakRti, he becomes

the experiencer.

 

As the all-pervading space is not tainted because of its subtlety,

so also the Atman permeating the entire body, is not tainted by

anything that the body, mind or intellect does. (XIII – 32.

The Atman is like the Sun which illuminates the whole world but is

at the same time uncontaminated by anything of the world. Every

action of the world as well as of the body, mind and intellect is

dominated by prakRti.

 

We said of the purushha that when he identifies himself with the

body and the senses he is the experiencer. He it is that enjoys

and suffers, he it is that is subject to pleasure and pain and he it

is that thinks he is the doer and the experiencer. He it is that

goes through the action of `knowing' and non-knowing'. Knowledge of

reality is relative, but pure consciousness is absolute. Deep within

him, within this purushha, there is another purushha, the

changeless, non-participating witness, the SAkshhi. (XV - 16)

Beyond the kshhara there is the silent, immutable, all-pervading

motionless self-existent Self -- sarvagatam achalam (II-24). He is

the akshhara purushha -- purushha, the Imperishable. He is

nirguNa, impersonal. He is the Consciousness Absolute. The guNas

have fallen now into a state of equilibrium. He is therefore

dissociated from the doings of the guNas. He is the inactive non-

doer and witness. He is `aware' that prakRti is the doer and

himself only the witnessing self (XIII - 29).

 

The concept of the two purushhas -- or two poises or roles of the

one purushha -- and a consequent grand design of a triple purushha,

is an essential contribution of the gItA to the understanding of the

eternal Upanishads. In order to explain this grand design to

ordinary people different masters give different illustrations.

Vidyaranya's Panchadasi gives a beautiful analogy in its 6th

chapter.

 

(To be concluded in Part -2)

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

Namaste

 

Part -2.

Imagine an empty pot. Even though empty, it encloses space (=

AkASha). We may call this enclosed space, the pot-space (=

GhaTAkAsha). This is not different from the universal space (=

mahAkAsha) which is outside the pot -- except that the pot-space is

space enclosed, conditioned by the material of the pot, whereas the

universal space is unconditioned (= nirupAdhita). Now fill up the

pot to the brim with water. The pot-space has vanished. We only

see water now but in the water we see the universal space

reflected. This reflection shows the sky, the stars or whatever

there is in the sky or the space, like buildings, trees, clouds,

etc. with all their different shades of colour. This reflected

presentation of the outside space may be called water-space ( =

jalAkAsha).Water-space shall not mean 'the space occupied by water'

but shall mean the reflection, in the water, of the mahAkAsha, which

is everywhere.

 

Now the water-space hides the real space, namely the pot-space

within and projects a falsity of an outer space, inside. This is

the grand delusion in which we are all in.

 

The water-space corresponds to the jIva (the individual soul) or

the kshhara-purushha. It hides the presence of the pot-space

within. The pot-space is the akshhara purushha. Without the

substratum of the pot-space there cannot be any water-space. We in

our delusion think that the water-space is all there is. We forget

that there is a pot-space within and it is the real space and that

the water-space is only a false projection of the reality. Without

the substratum of the imperishable purushha within, the jIva or the

kshara purushha or what we think as our personality has no

existence. The imperishable purushha is also called (XV-16)

kUTastha, the immovable, or the immutable, that which remains like

the unchanging iron-piece (anvil) on which the blacksmith does all

his hammering. [kUTastha also means the top of a mountainwhich

remains unchanged and undisturbed. kUTa also means the changeable

universe amidst which the unchangeable remains fixed.]

 

The water in the pot is the mind or intellect. It is the reflection

in our intellect of the universal consciousness that generates the

feeling, an individualised feeling, in us, of 'I' and 'mine'.

Man as the individual self owing to his ignorant self-identification

with the work and the becoming is bewildered by his ahamkAra or

egoism. (cf. ahamkAra-vimUDhAtmA --III-27). ahamkAra is nothing

but the notion that this conglomeration of the senses and the mind

which are the cause for all the actions, is the Self ( Atman). This

egoism, or ahamkAra, is not just the feeling 'I am'. The feeling 'I

am' is not wrong. But the feeling 'I am the body, I am the mind, I

am the intellect' or the feeling 'I am a combination of these' is

wrong. It is this attitude, this supposition, this feeling, this

impression, that is wrong.

 

The mind of Man has two alternatives -- either to be bound by

prakRti in the mutations of quality and personality or to be free

from Her workings in immutable impersonality. On one side there is

the status of the akshhara purushha or kUTastha and his

immutability. On the other there is the action of the kshhara

purushha or JIva or the kshetrajna and its mutability in prakRti.

Both these coexist. They coexist as two contrary sides, aspects or

facets of a supreme reality (mahAkAsha) which is limited by neither

of them. This reality which is the Ultimate, is the uttama

purushha, different from the other two. (XV - 17 ). He is the

purushottama. That is His param bhAvam. (supreme nature of

existence). He is the sarva-bhUta-maheSvara, the great Lord of all

beings. People foolishly think that the visual manifestation is all

there is (IX - 11 ). They allow the water-space to hide the real

pot-space within and revel in the virtual glory of the water-

space. But deep within us, by clearing our minds of all

its 'contents', -- by clearing the pot of all its water -- we must

get to the pot-space, that is the akshhara purushha. It is the

substratum which makes way for all the actions of the individual

purushha. The actions themselves are because of the prakRti -- its

three strands -- which in the analogy is the reflecting capability

of the water-mind. We should be able to transcend the mind and the

reflections that it carries with it and delve deep into our real

Self, the silent watching Self. This latter is nothing but the all-

pervading Space (brahman) except for the limitation by the material

of the pot. Both the purushhas are only the manifestation of the

Ultimate, which is the 'third purushha'. XV – 17 says:

Other than these two is that highest spirit called the Supreme Self,

who enters the three worlds and upbears them, the imperishable Lord.

 

He transcends the perishabliliy as well as the immutability.

Therefore He is called the Ultimate, Supreme, Transcendental,

purushha. The One word for this is purushottama. When we go to the

analogy of VidyaraNya this becomes clear: The water-space is the

perishable purushha; the pot-space is the immutable purusha; and the

universal space is the purushhottama. And all of them are ultimately

One.

The Purushhottama of the gItA is the controller of the other two

purushhas as well as the prakRti. (He is just the all-pervading

space of Vidyaranya's analogy). It is He that appears as the other

two purushhas and it is He that creates, sustains and dissolves,

through His prakRti. In the kshara, He puts forth his own prakRti

and manifests himself in the soul and plays the role of the knower-

doer-experiencer.

As Purushhottama however, He is neither merely impersonal nor merely

personal. He is one and the same being in both aspects. Infinity of

the Spirit does not just mean infinite immensity; it also implies

infinitesimal littleness. Though impersonal in its vastness, it has

become personal also in creating individual beings. He is the

impersonal-personal, nirguNo-guNI. guNabRn-nirguNo mahAn, says

the VishhNu-sahasra-nAma.

Man has to distinguish and isolate himself from the prakRtic

mind, by his discretionary intelligence. If he allows himself to

be mastered by the guNas, then he will have to suffer pain and

pleasure, grief and happiness, desire and passion, attachment and

disgust. Thus he has no freedom. If he wants freedom – and

happiness --, he must exist in oneness with the akshhara Purusha,

the immutable and impersonal Self, tranquilly observing and

impartially supporting the action, himself calm, indifferent,

untouched, motionless, pure, one with all beings in their self, not

one with prakRti and Her works. This Self, though by its presence

authorises (cf. IX–10 : mayAdhyakshheNa prakRtiH sUyate

sacarAcaraM ) the works of prakRti and supports them by its all-

pervading existence, does not itself create works or the state of

the doer or the linking of the works to their fruit. (V - 14)

 

It only watches prakRti in the kshhara. It accepts neither the sin

nor the virtue of the living creatures born into this birth. (V –

15: nAdatte kasyacit pApaM na caiva sukRtaM vibhuH ). It always

preserves its own spiritual purity. He who thus understands the

purushottama is no longer bewildered either by the appearances of

the world or by the apparently contradictory purushhas; He is the

whole-knower; He loves and worships in all the perfectly illumined

ways - says the Lord in XV - 19.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

Respected Professor ji, That was an excellent presentation - very

clear, crisp and unambiguous.

 

thank you.

 

best regards and pranams,

Om Namah Sivaya