A Perspective - 15

[Guest guest]

tat tvam asi – VI

 

Here is the perspective based on the scriptural understanding. We have to be

clear about the nature of the self and the nature of the world and the nature of

the self-realization without any confusion in the terms and the approach. Two

major problems arise by not having the correct understanding; one common error

is getting confused between paaramaarthika and vyaavahaarika (i.e. essentially

put one leg there and one leg here), and the second more pervasive error is

habitual mental objectification of the self in the very realization process.

The root cause of the problem stems predominately by not having the teaching

from a teacher, who himself trained from a proper teacher – essentially a

teacher that has sampradaaya or traditional teaching to back him-up. The reason

for traditional teaching is obvious since every possible pit fall has been

worked out and every conceivable doubt has been raised and answered

methodically. Possible objections

(puurvapaksha) and how to address those correctly (siddhaanta) are provided

traditionally not for intellectual arguments but for establishing clarity in

understanding. That is why scripture itself insists in having a proper teacher.

In the same token we need to understand clearly that this list serve is not a

meant for learning or replacement of a teacher, but the list serve can provide a

very good means for discussion for the clarification of the concepts – that is

for mananam – provided it is used effectively. The discussion is not a debate

but a means for clarification only.. We cannot decide the truth by debate, but

only recognize by knowledge and conviction.

 

The following topic keeps coming – Is scriptural study necessary or is ‘who

am I’ inquiry not sufficient for self-realization?.. The answer depends

clearly on what is involved in the –who am I – inquiry. Major problem lies

in not understanding the full implication of Bhagavaan Ramana’s teachings. For

those who are deeply interested – the video of the teaching of the SAT

DARSHANAM text of Bhagavaan is available in www.advaitaforum.org, where the

first two introductory slokas provide the depth of his teaching. Here is the

problem. If the – who am I – inquiry leads only in understanding the

saakshii chaitanyam or Witnessing Consciousness aspect of I am, then the inquiry

is incomplete and does not lead to realization of the SELF. In separating the

subject I from object this, we end up dvaita or duality with I am which is not

this, and this is which is not I am. In addition we will have multiple jiivas

with each jiiva realizing who he is.

The self realization should include the recognition of the mithyaatma aspect of

the world or unreality of the world with clear understanding that the self that

I am pervades the world of objects too, then only that inquiry of who am I –

leads to SELF realization. How does the -who am I, leads to the understanding

that I am the substantive of the world too. For that only Vedas provide the

ultimate pramANa or means of knowledge since the direct perceptual knowledge

confirms only the duality while the logic rests on perception for validation.

Self realization does not involve dismissing the world but sublimating the world

by understanding its substantive is the self that I am. That is what mithyaa

aspect of the world means. Hence Krishna clearly states – sarva bhuutastam

aatmaanam sarva bhuutanica aatmani – one who realizes that I am the self in

all and also recognizes that all (starting from creator to the blade of grass,

says Shankara) in

myself – He alone realizes. Hence Krishna declares: –

maya tatam idam sarvam jagat avyakta muurtinaa|

masthaani sarva bhuutaani na ca aham teshu avasthitaH| -9:4

na ca masthaani bhuutaani psyam me yogam aiswaram|

bhutabRinna ca bhuutastho mamaatmaa bhuutabhaavanaH| 9:5

 

I pervade this entire universe in an unmanifested form as the very

existence-consciousness itself. All being are in Me, but I am not involved in

their individual sufferings. In reality there is no beings in Me since I am pure

undifferentiated existence-consciousness yet appearing as many – look at my

glory Arjuna. Without the principle of existence nothing can exist – Any

existence of any being or object is only attributive name and form which is only

superimposition on the existence principle – Existence principle is never

affected by the changing attributive beings or objects. It is similar to gold

being unaffected by the changing names and forms.

 

Essentially who am I inquiry should involve understanding of three things. 1.

Who is that I am or tvam pada vichaara – inquiry into the subject, I am, by

rejecting subject is different from the object using neti neti – not this, not

this. 2) what is the nature of tat or that – that -standing for the entire

universe – essentially understanding that - I am - is the substantive or

essence of the whole world of objects – aitat aatmyam idam sarvam and 3)

finally understanding or equating oneness of the subject and the object as one

as stated by –asi- statement in the tat tvam asi. This is stated as the

fundamental advaitic principle – 1. brahma satyam, Brahman alone is real 2)

jagat mithyaa, the world is just apparent names and forms with Brahman as

substantive and 3) jiivaH brahma eva na aparaH, I am none other than Brahman.

This essence of advaita has to be clearly understood using scripture as a basis.

Exhaustive analysis of the scriptural

statements is provided by aachaaryaas in terms of bhaashyaas and prakaraNa

books; hence the need for the study. Hence scripture itself advises two things

– one is to approach a teacher to gain the knowledge of the truth and second

is shravana, mananam and nidhidhyaasana, that is study of the scriptures for a

prolonged length of time until one has clear understanding (shravana),

discussion of the contents until no more doubts exist in the mind of the seeker,

mananam and finally contemplation on the truth expounded by the scriptures,

nidhidhyaasana. This is well established and well trodden path and aside from

this there are no other direct paths or short cuts for this. Any other claims to

the contrary cannot be verified as there are no other pramANa for verification

too.

 

In this context, all other requirements including karma anushTaanam or

performing karmas or as well as their parityaaga or giving up karma, etc are

only aids in preparing the mind so that the above understanding can takes place.

What is required is a mind that is conducive for the knowledge and that is

stated by Shankara as possessing the saadhana chatuShTaya sampatti – the four

fold qualifications involving Veveka, vairaagya, Shat sampatti and mumukshutvam

– Discriminative intellect, Dispassion, Disciple and Desire for liberation –

the four Ds.

 

Preparation of the mind is essential. It is easy to say I am the subject and not

the object, in the who am I, enquiry. The logic is very simple. However this

logic can be easily applied to a car or a dog or any external object that I

perceive. I see the dog, the seer I is therefore different from the seen, and

hence I am not the dog. The application of the logic is easy when it comes to

all objects in the world. Nobody in the world mistakes that I am the dog that I

see, even though some people get so emotionally attached to their pets that they

suffer intensely when something happens to the objects that they love. This was

Arjuna’s problem and this is everybody’s problem – when –mine- includes

my own close relatives that I love.

 

However, when in applying the logic of - I am not this - to the body, mind and

intellect (BMI), the objects that I am so intimately associated with as -I am

this-, it becomes monumentally difficult to separate I am from this is, even

though it is logically clear that I cannot be -this. What makes it so difficult

is our attachments and aversions, first to the external body, next to the

emotional mind and finally to the intellectual accomplishments and convictions.

I am = this- is the essence of ego, where the I-ness associated with this BMI is

the ego or ahankaara, and a notion that this is mine is mamakaara. Ego forms the

basis for all our transactions in the world.. One has to use the BMI for

transacting with the world. In fact, the ego is involved in a subtle way even in

self-realization. Atma or all pervading existence-consciousness does not have to

realize and this BMI which is inert cannot realize. Hence realization as we

discuss below occurs in a

way with the identification with BMI only. The problem comes only when I do not

know myself and hence take myself only as this BMI in an absolute sense, even

though I know this is inert and I am a conscious entity. There will not be any

problem if I know who I am and deliberately take this BMI as I am for the

purpose of transactions – then I am jiivan muktaH, liberated while still

operating within BMI. The intellect, mind and the body in that order – as

though – borrow the light of consciousness that I am and act as sentient

entities operating in this world. Hence the essence of the human problem rests

in intense identification with the mind and intellect and through them with the

senses, and physiological functions, and then with the gross body. In this

operation of I am this, there are two components I am and this is, and the ego

involves identification of I am this. Realization of my true nature involves

intellectual discrimination or

disassociation of I am from this, using the very ego. I have to recognize my

true identity in the - I am this – as I am pure I am without this. This switch

in identification of my real nature or self-realization process requires in a

way the same ego or the mind in recognizing that I am not this and my true

nature is pure consciousness because of which I am conscious of the ego, mind

and intellect and the rest of the word through them. Hence when Vedanta says

ego gets surrendered or annihilated or when Ramana says that mind gets destroyed

(maanasantu kim maarganekRite naiva maanasam...) – all that means is that the

notional mind gets destroyed. Notions are due to ignorance and they can get

destroyed only by knowledge. Knowledge takes place in the mind only. For

knowledge to take place a means of knowledge or pramANa is required. For this

non-objectifyable entity (aloukikam), only Vedas form the required means of

knowledge. The separation of I am

from I am this (ego) using this very ego is indeed requires a very subtle

intellect that does not objectify the subject yet recognize the subject in the

very inquirer or inquiry. Lack of appropriate pramaaNa or means of knowledge is

one of the reasons why in the deep sleep state even though saakshii is there,

there is no jnaana prakriya or process that helps in gaining the knowledge. For

existence, which is all pervading, no medium is required for its manifestation.

For ignorance also no medium is required. However for knowledge to take place a

medium is required that involves a pramaaNa, prameya and pramaataa, the triad.

This can be the knowledge of the self or any objective knowledge including the

knowledge of the ignorance. In the case of the knowledge of the self, the

object of the knowledge, prameya, itself is the knower, pramaataa, and the veda

pramaaNa acts in this case as a mirror or darshaNam for a seer, pramaataa, to

see himself in and

through the prameya. Hence as we discussed before it is like seeing the image

of oneself, and using that image recognize the original self that is getting

reflected as the image in the mirror of the mind. Otherwise I cannot see myself

without the mirror. Similarly I need the mind to see my reflection and by seeing

the reflection I recognize or realize my true nature. I am currently

misapprehending myself that I am the mind. With the Vedantic teaching, I

recognize my true nature using the same mind by seeing the light of illumination

that is getting reflected in the mind and from that reflected light of

consciousness realize that I am original the light of consciousness whose light

is illumining the mind. The sequence can be visualized in this way. When a

thought rises in the mind, I am conscious of the thought because the wave of the

thought is illumined by the reflected light of consciousness from the mind. That

is what constitutes the knowledge of

the thought. Hence first thing we need to know is every thought has two

components; the contents of the thought which is related to the attributes of

the object (idam vRitti) and reflected light of consciousness that illumining

the thought because of which the contents of the thoughts become known.

Currently we get carried away by the contents of the thought and do not

recognize the light of illumination because of which the thought is known. The

same thing happens when we see an object outside. The external light falls on

the object and that light gets reflected and reaches eyes. An image is projected

on the retina which the optical nervous system carries to the brain. This

electrical signal has to be converted into thought. Lord has provided a

programming language that converts the signal to vRitti in the mind (similar to

the computer processer converting input data into a machine language that it can

understand). We do not understand this programming

language. Thus what is projected is attributes of the object as measured by

senses that provided an input signal that forms image in the mind. This image

with attributive content is called vRitti. As the vRitti forms, it reflects the

light of consciousness by which I become conscious of the thought or vRitti.

Becoming conscious of the thought is the same as gaining the knowledge of the

thought. That means I know the thought whose contents are nothing but the sense

input arising from the vision of the object. The object out there is now imaged

as the thought in the mind. We are conscious of the thought only because it is

illumined by the reflected light of consciousness that I am.

 

Normally we get carried away with the sense input forgetting it is the reflected

light image from the object. We rarely pay attention to the light that helps in

the seeing process. Similarly, we rarely pay attention to the light of

consciousness that is illumining the thought and get carried away with the

contents of the thought. Without thought forming in the mind there is no

reflection. Hence self-realization is not elimination of thoughts and make the

mind empty which itself is a struggle, but pay attention to the light of

consciousness that is illumining (because of which we are knowing the presence

and the contents of the thoughts) rather than get carried away with the thought

contents. Hence Kenopanishad says – it is not that what the eyes can see, but

because of which the eyes have the capacity to see, it is not that what ears can

hear, but that because of which the ears have the capacity to hear, it is not

that which mind can think of, but that

because of which the mind has the capacity to think of, is Brahman not this

that one worships. Hence Veda as pramaaNa is directing the mind to shift the

attention from the contents of the thoughts to that which makes the thoughts

known – that light of consciousness that is getting reflected by the sequence

of thought waves – say know that alone is Brahman not any objectified concept

that you worship.

 

Paying attention to the light of consciousness that is getting reflected in

every thought, particularly in the very fundamental thought as I am this (notion

of ego) is difficult only because I get carried away with the contents of the

thoughts and do not pay attention to the reflected light of consciousness

because of which that very thought is getting revealed. The most common problem

of a Vedantic student is looking for self-realization as an event in time. In

the very longing for Brahman, the mind is conceptualizing Brahman as an object

to be known. Self is self-revealing all the time. There is no time I am not

conscious of the thoughts that arise in mind, as mind cannot stop thinking

unless one goes to deep-sleep state. Thoughts occur in sequence and are

interconnected in terms of contents. When I pay attention to the contents, I

forget the fact that the thought is an object that I am conscious of. I jump

from one thought to the other since they

occur in rapid sequence each somehow connected to the other. Like a monkey

jumping from one branch to the other and one tree to the other, I jump from one

thought to the other without any time to stand apart and look at how a thought

is getting revealed. For me to know each thought that rises in my mind,

existence-consciousness that I am has to provide the existence as well as

illumination for the thought so that I am conscious of the existence of the

thought and its contents. For me to pay attention away from the thought

contents without getting carried away by it involves complete detachment and

vigilant observation. JK says just observe you mind or thoughts, without

providing a means to achieve it. It is difficult to get detached from the

thoughts to be an observer of the thoughts since these thoughts are centered on

my likes and dislikes. Detachment from the thoughts require attaching my mind to

something that remains constant without changing

and examining the thoughts that arise as an impartial observer or a saakshii

without getting carried away with the thoughts. Vedanta says that can done only

if I can surrender my likes and dislikes at the alter of my devotion that is

stable, noble and ever inspiring for the mind to hold on to it. That is the

bhakti that saints and sages talk about. That surrender of all my likes and

dislikes or raaga dveShaas at the alter of my devotion is what is called as

sharaNaagati or prapatti. Krishna says that is not easy either but with constant

practice and detachment one can achieve it- abhyaasenatu kounteya vairaagyena ca

gRihnate. Since thoughts that are entertained are also about the nature of the

reality it becomes easier to get detached from attachments other than to the

truth which is never changing and eternal. Karma yoga also helps in purifying

and neutralizing the intensity of these likes and dislikes.

 

As the intensity of the likes and dislikes are neutralized, I can detach myself

from the flow of the thoughts and be a silent observer of the thoughts..

Becoming a saakshii, I can witness how the light of consciousness illumines all

the thoughts. Since thoughts are nothing but images of the world of objects, I

begin to recognize that I lend the support to all the thoughts and indirectly to

the world of objects, since independent of me their existence and awareness

cannot be established.

 

This surrender of the ego is beautifully expressed by Bhagavaan Ramana in the

very invocation sloka of Sat Darshanam – mRityunjayam mRityibhiaashritaanaam,

aham matirmRityumupaiti puuvam …– He says the one who is afraid of death

approaches Lord MRityanjaya who is a conquer of the death (Lord Shiva) for

protection. Lord instead of protecting his devotee from the fear of death,

Bhagavaan Raman says that He destroys the devotee. It may sound unreasonable on

the part of the Lord to destroy those who come to Him for protection. What Lord

destroys is devotee-deity duality by destroying the ego (aham matiH – the

notion of I-ness) because of ones identification with his BMIs. The death or

change occurs only for the finite and not for the infinite. Hence He destroys

their notions of separateness from Him. Recognition that I am the pure light of

consciousness that eternally exists is liberation or moksha or freedom from all

limitations. It is not

something to gain or somewhere to go or something to be given – it is

recognition that I am nitya mukta swaruupaH – I am the eternal being one

without a second ever liberated since there was never a bondage for me.

 

When I did not have clear understanding of my true nature, I mistook myself to

be finite and localized BMI. Since my true nature is infiniteness, I could not

accept this superimposed finiteness of mine and therefore continuously tried to

work to gain infiniteness by adding or subtracting finite entities to my BMI.

Now I recognize that I was never finite but existence-consciousness that is

infiniteness – satyam jnaanam and anantam I am. It is not that I became

infinite; I recognize that I was ever infinite.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda