Here is the essence of the investigation into superimposition. Knowing something as it is not is superimposition. Doer, enjoyer, knower, the well-known nature of the self in these forms is its superimposed form.
One aspect of superimposition is natural, the other is scriptural. Natural superimposition happens with the me-mine-ness in mind and senses and it is the basis of immediate dealings, whether of the wise person, the ignorant, of humans or animals. This superimposition becomes illusory through discrimination, but the dealings that are based on it do not disappear, since it is a requirement of senses and other adjuncts. Scriptural superimposition is only for humans. Its aim is to remove the faults caused by natural superimposition and thereby purify the mind. After the knowledge of the identity of the self and brahman happens, scriptural superimposition loses its motive.
There are two types of natural superimposition : character-superimposition and character-person-superimposition (dharmaadhyaasa and dharmee adhyaasa). Ascribing the characteristics of the not-self upon the self is character-superimposition. A person becomes happy or sad when his wife or child are happy or sad. People even become happy or sad based on their caste, creed, sect or nation by superimposing that joy on sorrow upon themselves. Even the body is a not-self, and therefore the characteristics of the body are ascribed upon the self in a similar manner. "I am fat, thin, fair, dark, sitting, standing" etc. beliefs show a clear superimposition of the body's characteristics upon the self. Similarly, the characteristics of the senses are superimposed on the self in expressions such as "I am deaf, mute, handicapped" and so on. So too with mental characteristics - "I am lustful, doubtful, of firm resolution" and so on. Here, we need to discriminate as follows : The "I" is the non-character-imbibing entity, and so all characteristics should stay where they are, they should not be ascribed upon the self.
Question : On sorrow or pain arising in the body, "I am in pain" or "I am sad", this clear thought flow arises. How can one negate that?
Answer : We need not negate it, we need to understand it. Sorrow or pain happens in the experiencer's mind, it stays in the mind whether it is to do with one's own body or someone else's. The mind is created out of food. The Upanishad says that digested food is divided into three portions. One becomes the mind, another becomes the body, and another is discarded. Drugs create one type of mind, alcohol creates another type of mind, an injection dulls the mind and all sorrow and pain sleep when the mind sleeps. Therefore, through assertion and negation, we know that sorrow and pain stay in the mind alone.
Now, let the characteristics of the mind remain in the mind, and those of the self, in the self. The self is the witness of the gross and subtle bodies, and stands apart from both of them. It is the witness of sorrow, and not sorrowful. When knowledge happens, the mind and its characteristics become illusory and "I am pure awareness" this knowledge happens. At that point, "I am sad" - this resultant thought flow (phala vritti) wants to arise but it cannot. It wants to arise due to prior practice or due to natural superimposition, but does not arise due to the knowledge of one's own true nature. If it even does arise sometimes, then due to the firm understanding that it is illusory, it does not sadden the self.
We want to say that sorrow or pain is experienced in the mind, and it is worn in the self due to ignorance. It's impact is the resultant thought flow "I am sad". This is character-superimposition. It is removed through knowledge
***
Now let us talk about character-person-superimposition. This possessor of the I notion (aham pratyayee) whose nature is "I am happy, I am sad, I am distracted, I am lustful" etc. - one who possesses these sorts of arrogations, he is the root of all misfortune. Notions are created of the "this" target through inert objects, but when you join them with the "I" e.g. "I am wealthy, I have children" etc. they become the possessors of the I notion. "I am a devotee, I am a wise person, I am of good moral conduct" - even these examples are possessors of I notion though influenced by impressions of scripture. This I-entity which is of the nature of doer-enjoyer-knower is the possessor of the I-notion alone. This alone is called the "I-sense" (aham artha). The "I-sense" is a different entity and the "I" (pure witness) is a different entity. But taking the "I" as transactional (possessor of the I notion) - this is character-person-superimposition. Understanding the "I" as different than the "I sense" and knowing the "I" to be brahman - this removes both character and character-person superimpositions.
This mind is like a guest house. Everyday, thousands of "this-I" notions come and go in it. We should stay indifferent to all of these. The witness of all these notions is the substratum of the container of all of these notions - this knowledge should be obtained. With this, the entire mind will be proven illusory.
What came on the movie screen, there is no need to remember this. What will come on it, there is no need even to worry about that. Whatever comes on the screen, continue to watch it. In that there is no "me", there is no "mine". Don't fight with a shadow, don't love a shadow, don't marry a shadow, and don't die for a shadow.
"In this manner, this beginningles-endless, natural, illusory appearance-filled and producing the doer-enjoyer-nature in the self, this superimposition is visible in all worlds. This alone is the cause of all misfortune. For its removal at the core, and for the attainment of the knowledge of the identity of self and brahman, all Upanishads have engaged. How can this goal of Vedanta be attained - this is the method and aim of contemplation of brahman."
Therefore, we now begin the contemplation of brahman.
No comments:
Post a Comment