In order to gain knowledge of the rope, it is necessary to negate the illusory misconceptions arising on it. Similarly, for knowledge of the pure form of the self, all illusory misconceptions arising in it need to be negated. The gross-subtle-causal bodies, food sheath and other sheaths, arrogators of vishva etc., the world and its cause Prakriti etc. as well as cause-effect-formed entire adhyaatma, adhibhoota and adhidaiva creation is a mere misconception (vikalpa) in the self. Therefore, the Maandookya shruti describes the fourth (tureeya) step in the form of that aware-alone (chinmaatra) self essence, indicated by negating all these misconceptions. That alone is the witness, that alone is the self, and that alone is the sole entity to be known.
Here, it is important to remember that even after negating all misconceptions of the snake in the rope, there is a strong need for light for knowledge of the rope. But in the case of the self, it is not so. The self is self-illumined. For illuminating itself, it does not require another. Therefore, only by negating misconceptions alone is the self experienced in its true nature.
If we assume for a moment that there is another way to realize the self besides negation. What can it be? Scripture describes five methods :
1. Relationship (sambandha vritti) Like "Pot of water". Water does not make the pot, but there is a relationship between the pot and the water in it.
2. Convention (roodhi vritti) Like "Pankaja (born of mud)" is a conventional reference to a lotus.
3. Type (jaati saamaanya) Like "This is a man". In this statement, "this" refers to a member of the type "man".
4. Action (kriyaa vritti) Like "Mohan is a driver". A person is referred to by the actions he performs.
5. Attribute (guna vritti) Like "Red Flower".
The self is mere reality, awareness, bliss, non-dual entity. How can any of the afore-mentioned methods reveal it? The world is an illusion in the self, there is no world in the inherent nature of the self, then how can we use relationship? Convention does not work here as well. There is no adjunct in the self, how will type reveal it? There is also no action nor attribute in the self, how can they reveal anything?
In reality, the self is expressed in the form of vishva, taijasa and praajyna. But, by the notion of disconnectedness being present in them, their brahman-ness remains unknown. That is why the shruti negates self-ness in these three. By this negation, the tureeya self essence, which is separate from then, is attained. Also, in the self, in the transactional state (dashaa) of the three states, the experience of disconnectedness in the form of vishva etc is proven to be illusory.
The self is not "internalized knowledge", in other words, it is distinct from taijasa. It is not "externalized knowledge", in other words, it is distinct from vishva. It is not "both knowledge" (ubhaya prajnya), which means it is not in a state between them. It is not a "mass of knowledge" (prajnya ghana), in other words, it is distinct from praajnya. The self is neither praajnya nor apraajnya. In other words, it is not the knower (pramaataa), it is distinct from the knower, and is not non-aware, inert or void also. Vishva, taijasa, praajnya, pramaataa, doer, enjoyer, all these are plays of awareness, whether they are in the microcosm or macrocosm, contain an awareness which alone is called the self. All these are non-different than the self, but the self is distinct from any of these. It is the absolute pure nature of this. In it alone is all of this transactionally misconceived (vikalpita). (Maandookya Upanishad 7)
The self cannot be a seen (adrishyam) because it is the seer of all, and is present it seeing and not seeing both. It is not the transactional doer of either microcosm or macrocosm but is present in all aspects of transaction (avyavahaaryam). It cannot be imbibed through organs of action or knowledge but it is present behind all dealings (agraahyam). It is distinct from everything - this alone is its indicator. No other indicator can indicate it, because only disconnected entities can be indicated (alakshanam). The self cannot be conceptualized (avaangasagochara) that is why it is "achintyam". No words or thought flows can describe it that is why it is "avyayapadeshyam". Words or thought flows can only point to the disconnected. The self is not the thought flow but the essence of all thought flows, knowledge. Therefore it is "pratyayasaara". The one non-transgressing I thought flow in waking and other states alone is the place of investigation into the witness self. That is why the self is called "ekaatmapratyayasaara". Or, in the form of the investigation into the causality of the world, that Isvhara thought flow which remains present, the thought flow which is its essence is ekaatmaprayayasaara. Or, the identity-knowledge of the subjects of the afore-mentioned thought flows (witness and Ishvara), which is the great-statement-born brahma-form-vritti (mahaa vaakya vritti), is the means or essence in the topic of the self. That self is called ekaatmaprayayasaara.
Also, the absence of the world in the self is called "upashama" (prapanchopashamam). In other words, there is absence of the substances of the waking and other states in the self. In yet other words, the self is the container (adhikarana) of the absence of the world therefore, the world is illusory, appearing in the self. The self is quiet in other words it is the non-transformational (nirvikaara) anvil (koothasta) and is also action-less (nishkreeya). Since the self alone is the supremely dear entity, it is "shiva". It is free of difference and other misconceptions, it is in the form of non-duality. Since it is different than the three steps of waking etc., it is the fourth or tureeya. Such an all-negating-substratum aware-only witness alone is that self, that alone should be known, that alone is brahman, that alone is all. (Maandookya Upanishad 2).
No comments:
Post a Comment