In Advaita Vedanta, the primary basis of contemplation is "superimposition" (adhyaasa). Therefore, before the contemplation of the knowledge of the identity of brahman and the self is begun, it is necessary to know the clear nature of superimposition. Only on the basis of superimposition can the delusion or ignorance of the self or brahman can be proven. If the ignorance is not proven, then even liberation through knowledge cannot be proven, and there will be no need for contemplation of brahman. In the introduction to the Brahma Sootra commentary, Bhagavaan Shree Shankaraachaaryajee Mahaaraaj has dealt with the commentary of superimposition in a scholarly manner. On the basis of that commentary, the brief analysis of the essence of superimposition is being presented.
Superimposition means : the ascripbing on one thing upon another. Adhi = upon another, aasa = ascribing something else. In this manner, ascribing the characteristics or behaviour of one thing onto another is called superimposition. All the natural social behaviour in the world is based upon this superimposition, although this superimposition is born of ignorance. Accurate knowledge removes ignorance and the superimposition born of it. How? This has to be understood.
The root of all social behaviour is the doer of the behaviour (vyavahaara kartaa) and his nature is superimposition based. Two kinds of apprehensions are experienced : object (vishaya) and subject (vishayee). The object is the target domain of "this", and the subject is the target domain of "I". This, that, you, anything that is known by these is all object, and that which is experienced as me is the subject. The object is visible like a pot or a cloth, it is non-immediate like heaven, or it is immediate such as mental transformations. The visible is "this"-ness. Non-immediate is "that"-ness. Immediate also is experiences as the nature of the other therefore it is also "this"-ness. "You"-ness which are other beings in front of us, they also appear different than the "I", to such an extent that the human, who feels a sense of "this"-ness with the body, develops "my"-ness and "mine"-ness with it. But in those other beings who are referred to as "you", there is no "I"-ness in those and even if there is, it is due to extreme delusion, plus it is unstable.
There are multitudes of objects, their presence and absence both is experienced by the subject who is only one. In other words the subject is the seer, and the object is the seen. There are several seens, and they are transient and inert, whereas the witness is one, unchanging and sentient or aware. The seen is dependent on the seer, but the seer is independent of the seen. It is the witness of both the presence and absence of the seen. The absence of a seen can come into our experience, but our own absence can never be experienced. Therefore the seen is perishable but the seer is not. In this manner the seer and the seen, the subject and the object, are mutually opposed to each other, like light and darkness. Yet, by superimposing one upon the other, we engage in all kinds of natural social dealings.
"I am a human". This knowledge occurs by imagining the human form in the five elements, and by superimposing or identifying with that form. It is a superimposition-generated knowledge. All our activities spring up after accepting this "I am a human" idea, Without the "I-me" notion in the organs of actions, how can the witness experience itself as the doer? Without identifying oneself with one's mind and organs of sense, how can the witness experience itself as the enjoyer and the knower? Which means it cannot do so. In this manner the body, senses, mind and the related wealth, wife-husband become the target of identification, and the I-mine notion, the basis for all social dealings is gained. Then, all other dealings commence from there. Even after all this, this identification is illusory.
Identification means "taking the not-self as the self" or "merging the self with the not self". This is identification.
Question : If the subject and the object, the self and the not-self, seer and seen are different like light and darkness with regards to their nature and characteristics, then how can there be a possibility of their superimposition? How can the one and many, the aware and inert, the perishable and imperishable, become mutually superimposed?
Answer : We also say that it should not happen. But it happens, that much is clear. And that only is the root of all sorrow and misfortune, this is also perceived. In such a situation, its cause has to be investigated. The discrimination of the subject and object is not done properly, this lack of discrimination, this ignorance, is its cause. Due to this lack of discrimination, superimposition of the completely opposed characteristics and consequences of both of these becomes possible.
No comments:
Post a Comment