In Vedanta, the opposition of the doer and the action is well-known. That which is the doer cannot be the action, and that which is the action cannot be the doer. Whichever rule applies to action, also applies to knowledge. He who is the knower cannot be the known (jnyeya), and that which is the known cannot be the knower. The knower is distinct from the known.
The refuge of the process of knowledge is the knower, his instrument is "knowledge" and his object is the known. With this trifecta of knowledge, knower and known alone does each knowledge occur. Knower of means, means and target of means, respectively, mean the same as knower, knowledge and known. In reality, our knowledge become divided into three parts: known object, knowledge-shaped thought-flow, and the knower I (aham).
It is clearly understood that the knower "I" is distinct from both the target and the means of knowledge. This-ness is seen (bhaasnaa) in the means and the target of means, and I-ness or non-this-ness is seen in the knower. The "I" appears distinct from the object and thought-flow, but there is no "I" which appears distinct from the knower. Also, the I appears in many forms: sometimes the I appears and a sinner and sometimes as a saint, sometimes as a aversion-prone person (raagee) and sometimes as a renunciate (viraagee), sometimes as happy and sometimes as sad. That I-I which is appearing in various forms, that cannot appear without the mixing up of the I (aham) and this (idam). By the compounding (samaahaara), by the mixing up of the I and "this", this knot (granthi) is being seen. This appearing "I" is not just the I and not just the "this". For most people, this appearing (bhaasamaana) I is the meaning of their I-notion, it is the I-sense or aham artha. Doer, knower and enjoyer (the arrogator of action, knowledge and enjoyment), in the form of which is your experienced I, is an appearing I. It alone is called the I-sense.
The interesting point is that even though it is seen in various forms, we always have a firm conviction of our one-ness. At one time I was a saint, happy, renunciate, and at another time I am sinner, sad, aversion-prone individual. Even through the sin and merits keep changing, the I remains one. Who is that I?
That which is the changeful I-sense is not you. You are the witness of those changes. The non-changing knowledge in the object, thought-flow and knower (I-senses), that knowledge is you. In the knowledge of the pot and the knowledge of the cloth, there is a difference between the cloth and the pot, but not in knowledge. There is a difference in the shape of the pot-shaped and cloth-shaped thought flows, but not in their knowledge. There is a difference in the object of the pot knower and cloth knower, but not in the knower himself.
In the object, thought-flow, I-sense, in all of these, there is an inert aspect. And that pure knowledge, that consciousness (samvit) in them, that is one. Consciousness is self illumined, it is one, there is no difference within it. If we say here that the I-sense alone is consciousness, there here also, the changing inert aspect in the I-sense, should be discriminated from consciousness. If you were the changing inert aspect, how would you know that there is a change in the inert? The truth is that you are the consciousness alone, non-changing self. But by superimposing the not-self and the characteristics of the not-self upon you, you have accepted yourself as the changing I-sense.
The I-sense is different in each body. and in consciousness, there is no difference between the body and the internal organ.
What is the substratum of the appearing I and this? In the opinion of the Chaaravaaka school, all this is inert matter, from that alone arises the I and this, their creation and dissolution. All this behaviour is of the inert in the inert. But this opinion is incorrect. Neither can one's inertness become the experience of oneself, nor is this logical. Then the entire world will attain nothing but blindness. If a blind person follows another blind person, he will have to fall in every step. Then? The substratum of the I and this is the pure aware self. It is the illuminator of I and this both, connected (anvita) with both, yet distinct from both, and is the substratum of both.
If you say that there is no need for the substratum of the I and this, then no difference whatsoever would have been without substratum. If the substratum is a void, then there would be no originating from absence (abhaava se bhaava kee utpatti). If the substratum is inert, then the state of world blindness would happen. If we accept the I as the substratum of the I, and the this as the substratum of the this, then this statement is tainted with the fault of "aatmaashraya dosha". If we take the I as the substratum of the this and vice versa, then this becomes "anyonyaashraya dosha". If we assume that the substratum is a third entity different from the I and this, then we will have to assume a fourth, and this will become untenable (anavasthaa). In this manner, the one aware substratum of the I and this is proven, and the aware cannot be distinct from the consciousness I. Therefore, that consciousness which is distinct from the I sense,and is the illuminator of the I-senses, thought-flow and object, and is distinct from all of them, that alone is the substratum which remains.
This consciousness is never resolved (leena) and never manifests (prakata), since saying this will be "vadato vyaaghaata" fault. The consciousness does not resolve nor manifest, resolution and manifestation happen in consciousness. Without knowledge, how would they be experienced? They are all objects, thought-flows and I-senses, all of which are resolved or manifested, are not consciousness.
This consciousness is such an infinite knowledge, in which there is no coming, no going, but it is the illuminator of those objects that come and go. There is no expansion or contraction, but it is that by which there is knowledge of expansion and contraction. There is no inside or outside in it, no birth or dfeath, no now or then. It is such an infinite (ananta) knowledge which is not an object, not a subject, not a thought flow, in other words, that which is not your disconnected I-snese, that infinite knowledge is nothing else but you. You are so beautiful, in which all beauty is imagined. You are so sweet, in which the entire sweetness of the macrocosm is imagined. You are such a reality in which the entire realities appear without really existing, in which all truths become illusions, in which inertness and awareness also do not have a difference! This alone is your self nature, your consciousness, nature.
Objects appear to be many, and their difference also appears. Objects are indescribable and their difference also is indescribable. Thought-flows appear many and their refuge also is different. Earlier they do not exist, they then arise, and later they do not exist. In technical terms, thought-flows are with-refuge, with-object, prior-absence-partners (praag abhaava pratiyogini) and after-absence-partners (pradhvansa aabhaava pratiyogini), and are mutually different. In addition, in order to manifest, they require an undivided consciousness.
Over there, the I-sense also is illuminated with object (savishayaka). Fundamentally, both thought-flow-ness and object-ness are ascribed upon the I-sense. Actions, enjoyments and knowledge have objects (vishaya). Their thought-flows have characteristics. Without superimposing both of these, no one can experience the appearing form (I-sense) of one's pure I.
Consciousness is light and illuminator. I-senses is lit. As each characteristic of thought-flow is superimposed on the I-sense, it is lit, and after it is lit, the I-sense is grasped (graheeta). That is why the I-sense, thought-flow and object, all three are lit, whereas pure consciousness is the illuminator, it is self illumined. A lit object remains sometimes, does not remain sometimes, but the illuminator illumines both the presence and the absence. Therefore the lit entity is falsified (baadhita, illusory) and the consciousness is non-falsified.
See the divisions of knowledge : created knowledge is obtained through actions, happened knowledge is obtained through time and matter, pure knowledge is free from the notions of time, space and matter. This pure knowledge alone is your inherent nature, your self.
Body, senses, internal organ, their divisions - gross, subtle, causal bodies, the food sheath and other sheaths, the states of their experience such as waking, all their characteristics and arrogators, the agglomerate (sanghaata) of all of these, and the disconnected appearing "I" which accepts this agglomerate as I and mine, all this is the description of the I-sense. This I-sense is also called jeeva or the individual soul.
That which is called a scene has space-time-object in it, has many shapes, thought-flows, arrogations, it appears sometimes, and does not appear other times, keeps changing, takes various forms due to impressions of prior actions, takes future forms through current actions, appears are desire-prone with the push of one impression. Scenes keep appearing, but the consciousness remains steady as one. This means that no matter what the scene is, it is the object of the "this"-thought-flow. And, that which is known after grasping the this-shape-ness is a scene. What is bliss is consciousness. Even the I-sense is known, it is known after the knowledge of the "this"-aspect.
The consciousness which is unaffected and untouched by "this"-ness, the un-"this", is free from all faults of the "this"-ness. "This"-ness has time, un-this (anidam) does not have time. "This"-ness has space, un-this does not have space. "This"-ness has objects, un-this (anidam) does not have objects. Similarly, "this"-ness contains action, happiness, sorrow, change, knowledge (pramaa), delusion, and un-this does not contain any of this. The "this" is illumined by another, is an object, is subservient, has a dependent existence. The un-"this" is self illumined, without object, the refuge of all and has an independent existence. In these entities which have opposite characteristics, the switching of characterstics is attained only through non-discrimination, not otherwise.
And why is there any non-discrimination? That also is due to non-discrimination. Non-discrimination does not have any cause. In this manner, the I-sense in the form of I and this, created out of non-discrimination prevails. But in the light of discrimination, after negating this-ness, it is available in the pure-consciousness form. This is the "pratyagaatmaa", the inner self, of everyone.
This inner self is of the nature of pure consciousness, of light, it is self illumined. It does not need any other for knowledge of itself. Like the sun, it remains ever shining. Space, time, object, person, situation, cause, effect, action, enjoyment, individual soul, Ishvara, are illumined by its light alone.
Eyes are required to see a watch. The mind is required to see the eyes. The intellect is needed to see a friend or foe, To see the waking and other states of the intellect, there is no need for any of the afore-mentioned entities. The inner self illumines them directly. That is why it is called the witness. Without the light of the sun, without the eyes and other senses, without the thought flow of the intellect, without the thought flow of ignorance (without the appearing I), without the need for someone other than itself, beyond the visible-indirect-immediate in the form of directly immediate and self illumined, that self-illumined aware self is the witness.
When this self illumines time, it is called endless (nitya). When it illumines space, it is called pervasive. Similarly, when it illumines all cause and effect, it is called the universal self (sarvaatmaa). But this self is always self illumined. It sees all but does not become a seen, and even without being a seen, there is never any doubt about its existence. You experience yourself all the time without any doubt. There is no person in this world can never experience the absence of his "I", this is an open challenge.
This self-illumined self is anvil-like immovable (kootastha). "Koota" means the peak of a mountain, the anvil of a blacksmith or goldsmith, completely immovable and non-changing. Summer, winter, snow, heat come and go but the peak stands immovable. The anvil undergoes several beatings of the hammer so that ornaments can be created or transformed, but the anvil remains immovable. Similarly, an infinite number of scenes arise and subside in front of the inner self, but it remains firmly established in its self illumined nature of oneness.
The visible world in a dream is false, and that false dream is superimposed upon the true dream witness. Similarly, embedded in the scenes of the waking-dream-deep sleep samaadhi-formed falsehood, there is a aware, innser self in the form of the substratum. That is the immovable koothasta. The term immovable is made in reference to the aware substratum.
By being the illuminator of space it is pervasive, and therefore it is partless. By being the immovable, it is free from the disconnectedness of the flow of time. By being self-illumined, it is free from the disconnectedness of the flow of object. By being partless it is free from the disconnected flow of space. In this manner, the witness which is of the form of consciousness, is free from the disconnectedness of space-time-object, and is brahman. By following the general existence in all objects, it is the one existence-only object. By following all knowledge, it is the one aware-only object.
By following all bliss, it is the one bliss-only object. There is no opposition of the one and the many in it, like the dream world, that is why it is non-dual. Therefore, that consciousness alone is the supreme non-dual brahman, in the form of existence-consciousness-bliss.
The following points should be kept in mind regarding the witness entity:
1. There is no space-oriented length or breadth in the witness. The witness illuminates the length and the breadth. The witness does not stay in a particular space, space itself stays in the witness
2. There is no time-oriented age in the witness. The knowledge of 50 or 100 years happens through the witness. The witness does not stay in any particular time, time itself stays in the witness.
3. There is no matter-oriented weight in the witness. The witness is the witness of matter. Matter is imagined in the existence of the witness.
4. There is no inter-intra-inherent difference in the witness. The witness is the witness of difference alone. Therefore the witness is of the nature of non-difference.
5. The witness can never become a seen, but the seen cannot remain different from the witness. That is why, the three bodies, five sheaths, three states, the entire world of adhibhootas, adhidaivas and adhyaatma can never become the witness. Yet they are illumined by the witness alone. Since the I-sense is also illumined, it is not the witness. Since Ishvara is seed-particular (beeja vishishta), it also is not the witness. Due to being imagined as the sprout (ankura) in the form of the internal organ is the particular witness individual soul (I-sense), and the particular witness due to imagination of the maayaa-form seed is Ishvara. The witness itself is not particularized, it is existence alone, awareness alone, bliss alone, non-dual brahman.
6. There is no cause of the witness.
7. There is no effect of the witness. The witness is the witness of cause and effect.
8. The witness cannot be many otherwise they will become mutual scenes. That is why, there cannot be different witnesses in different bodies.
9. The witness cannot be happy, sad or an arrogator. The witness is the illuminator of all I-senses.
10. The witness does not stay in any body or any sheath or any state. In fact, all bodies, sheaths, states appear in the witness by the witness.
11. The illuminator and substratum of the entire world is the witness awareness alone, because no experience different from the witness is possible.
12. When the this-ness of the I-sense is negated, the witness becomes available. Therefore the witness is different than the I-sense. But the I-sense is not distinct from the witness.
No comments:
Post a Comment