adhyAtmavidyA in Synthesis: 1. The Great Questioning

[saidevo]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

concluding part of Chapter 8

"This udgIta, this music-sound, the AUM, is Supreme Brahman. In it are the Three, well indicated by the three letters. Realising the secret hidden between them, knowers of Brahman merge therein and become free from rebirth. When with the lamp of the AtmA, the jIva beholds Brahman with all-intentness, Brahman, the unborn, the time-less, the pure of all tattvas, then he becometh free from all bonds."

उद्गीतम् एतत्परमं तु ब्रह्म, तस्मिम्स्त्रयं सुप्रतिष्ठाक्षरं च ।
अत्रान्तरं ब्रह्मविदो विदित्वा, लीना ब्रह्मणि तत्परा योनिमुक्ताः ॥
यदा आत्मनत्वेन तु ब्रह्मात्वं दीपोपमेन इह युक्त्तः प्रपश्येत् ।
आजं धुवं सर्वतत्वेर्विशुद्धं, ज्ञात्वा देवं मुच्यते सर्वपाशौः ॥

udgItam etatparamaM tu brahma, tasmimstrayaM supratiShThAkSharaM cha |
atrAntaraM brahmavido viditvA, lInA brahmaNi tatparA yonimuktAH ||
yadA Atmanatvena tu brahmAtvaM dIpopamena iha yukttaH prapashyet |
AjaM dhuvaM sarvatatvervishuddhaM, j~jAtvA devaM muchyate sarvapAshauH ||
--shvetAshvatara upaniShad i.7.15

A Few More Ancient Texts

NOTE.--Some more texts from Vaidika as well as Buddhist writings may be added here, in support of the contents of this chapter.

Vedic Writers
bhagavad gItA

यदृच्छालाभसंतुष्टो ’द्वंद्वातीतो’ विमत्सरः ।
समः सिद्धौ आसिद्धौ च, कृत्वाऽपि न निबध्यते ॥

yadRuchChAlAbhasaMtuShTo 'dvaMdvAtIto' vimatsaraH |
samaH siddhau Asiddhau cha, kRutvA&pi na nibadhyate ||

"4.22: He who has visioned That Which is Beyond Duality, Which includes all Duals, he becomes free from all bonds and fetters of the soul; sane, equable, tranquil, in all conditions of gain or of loss; satisfied with and welcoming all that befalls; devoid of all discontents and jealousies.

निर्मानमोहाः, जितसङ्गदोषाः, अध्यात्मनित्याः, विनिवृत्तकामाः ।
’द्वंद्वैर्’ विमुक्ताः सुखदुःखसंज्ञौः, गच्छंति अमूढाः पदम अव्ययं तत्ः ॥

nirmaanamohAH, jitasa~ggadoShAH, adhyAtmanityAH, vinivRuttakAmAH |
'dvaMdvair' vimuktAH sukhaduHkhasaMj~jauH, gachChaMti amUDhAH padama avyayaM tatH ||

"15.5: Changeless, undecaying, unincreasing, is the state of That Which Transcends Duality. To It go those who have cast off pride and fear, clinging attachments, blinding infatuating desires; who look equably on the primal Duals, Pleasure and Pain; and devote themselves constantly to meditation on that Self Beyond Duality".

manu smRti

निर्मानमोहाः, जितसङ्गदोषाः, अध्यात्मनित्याः, विनिवृत्तकामाः ।
’द्वंद्वैर्’ विमुक्ताः सुखदुःखसंज्ञौः, गच्छंति अमूढाः पदम अव्ययं तत्ः ॥

karmaNAM cha vivekArthaM dharmAdharmau vyavechyat |
'dvaMdvair' ayojavat cha imAH sukhaduHkhAdibhiH prajAH ||

"1.26: The Supreme (It-Self beyond all Pairs, becoming focussed in a BrahmA, to create this our world) created Pleasure-and-Pain (as Primal Pair), and invested all living things with them: and (out of the experiencing, by humans, of these two, in innumerable settings, forms, situations, the Brahmaa-Ruler of our solar system, or this earth) wove the Scheme of Sin-and-Merit and- distinctions between Good-and-Evil deeds."

Isha upaniShad

विद्यां च, अविद्यां च, यः तद् वेद अभयं सह (सः ह) ।
अविद्यया मृत्युं तीर्त्वा, विद्यया अमृतं अश्नुते ॥

vidyAM cha, avidyAM cha, yaH tad veda abhayaM saha (saH ha) |
avidyayA mRutyuM tIrtvA, vidyayA amRutaM ashnute ||

"11: The True Knowledge (I-am-Not-This) and the False Knowledge (I-am-This-body etc.)--he who knows the Pair of both these together, he crosses beyond death, after having tasted and experienced it in consequence of the False Knowledge; and he tastes Immortality through the True Knowledge (which includes the False Knowledge plus its simultaneous repudiation)."

nRsiMha tApini upaniShad

तद् एजति, तन् न एजति, तद् दूरे तद् उ अन्तिके ।
तद् अन्तर् अस्य सर्वस्य, तद् उ सर्वस्य अस्य बाह्यतः ॥
अस्थूलो, अनणुः, अमध्यमो, मध्यमः; अव्यापको व्यापकः ॥
हरिः आदिः, अनादिः; अविश्वो, विश्वः; निर्गुणः, सगुणः; इति ।
तुरीयं, अतुरीयम्; आत्मानं, अनात्मानं; उग्रं, अनुग्रं ॥
वीरं, अवीरं; महान्तं, अमहान्तं; विष्नु, अविष्नु ॥
ज्वलंतं अज्वलंतं; सर्वतोमुखं, असर्वतोमुखं, इति ।

tad ejati, tan na ejati, tad dUre tad u antike |
tad antar asya sarvasya, tad u sarvasya asya bAhyataH ||
asthUlo, anaNuH, amadhyamo, madhyamaH; avyApako vyApakaH ||
hariH AdiH, anAdiH; avishvo, vishvaH; nirguNaH, saguNaH; iti |
turIyaM, aturIyam; AtmAnaM, anAtmAnaM; ugraM, anugraM ||
vIraM, avIraM; mahAntaM, amahAntaM; viShnu, aviShnu ||
jvalaMtaM ajvalaMtaM; sarvatomukhaM, asarvatomukhaM, iti |

"5: It moveth, and It moveth Not; 'Tis far, and yet 'Tis near: It is within all This, It is without. It is not large, nor small; not middling, yet the middle; not-pervading, ail-pervading; with beginning, and beginningless also: not the whole, also the whole; attributeless, and yet possessed of every possible attribute. It is the Fourth which transcends the Three, and yet not such (for It is immanent also in everything which is within the Three); It is the Self, It is also the Not-Self; It is harsh (and all-destroying), It is gentle (all-preserving); heroic, timid too; great, small; all-grasping, all-abandoning; flaming, and cool; facing on all sides, and facing none."

bhAgavata

अस्तीति नास्तीति च, वस्तुनिष्ठयोः, एकस्थथोः भिन्नविरुद्धधर्मयोः ।
वेशितं किंचन योगसांख्ययोः, समं परं ह्यनुकूमं बृहत् तत् ॥

astIti nAstIti cha, vastuniShThayoH, ekasthathoH bhinnaviruddhadharmayoH |
veshitaM kiMchana yogasAMkhyayoH, samaM paraM hyanukUmaM bRuhat tat ||

"6.4.32: Is and is not--both, and also all possible other contradictory qualities abide within that ultimate Reality, which yoga and sAMkhya endeavour to describe as equal with all and greater than all, as friend of all and foe of all."

nyAya sUtras

There is another 'mysterious' aphorism in the nyAya sUtrass, which, like the one quoted on p.125, supra, is pure Vedanta, taken by itself; though, in the context, it is given another meaning:

न सन्, न च असन्, न सद्-असत्, सद्-असतोः वैधर्म्यात् ॥

na san, na cha asan, na sad-asat, sad-asatoH vaidharmyAt ||

"4.1.48: Not existent, nor non-existent, nor both, because it has not the quality of either."

Buddhist Writers

The famous Bhikkhu, Asanga, who spread MahAyAna Buddhism in Thibet, writes in his mahAyAna-sUtra-alaMkAra 5.1:

न सन्, न चासन्, न तथ, न चान्यथ, न जायते, व्येति, न चावहीयते ।
न वर्धते, नापि विशुध्यते पुनः; विशुध्यते तत् परमार्थलक्षनं ॥

na san, na chAsan, na tatha, na chAnyatha, na jAyate, vyeti, na chAvahIyate |
na vardhate, nApi vishudhyate punaH; vishudhyate tat paramArthalakShanaM ||

"Not being, nor non-being; not thus, nor otherwise; It is not born, nor disminishes, nor decays in any way, nor increases, nor can be made purer--such is that Pure and Perfect parama-artha, Highest object of understanding."

Another very famous Bhikkhu, NAgArjuna, great chemist, discoverer and inventor of metallic preparations, rasa-s, for medical purposes, as well as profound philosopher, writes in his mAdhyamika kArikA:

अनिरोधं, अनुत्पादं, अनुच्छेदं, अशाश्वतं ।
अनेकार्थं, अनानार्थं, अनिर्गमं, अनागमं ॥

anirodhaM, anutpAdaM, anuchChedaM, ashAshvataM |
anekArthaM, anAnArthaM, anirgamaM, anAgamaM ||

"Not destructible, nor constructible, not slayable, nor procreatable, not transient, nor permanent, not One, nor Many, not coming, nor departing such is It (the Self denying the Not-Self).

Gauda-pAda, the guru's guru of ShankarAchArya, practically copies the above, in his mANDukya kArikA 32:

न निरोधो, न च उत्पत्ति:, न बद्धो, न च मुक्तता ।
न मुमुक्षुः, न विमुक्तः, इति एषा, परमार्थता ॥

na nirodho, na cha utpatti:, na baddho, na cha muktatA |
na mumukShuH, na vimuktaH, iti eShA, paramArthatA ||

"No in-hibition, no ex-hibition, no bondage, no freedom, no craving for deliverance, no emancipateness--such is the state of Parama-artha, Highest Object (of knowledge)."

Mutual Copying

During the 1200 years of the Buddhist period ot Indian history, followers of Gautama Buddha and followers of the Vedas reproduced more or less the same old teachings; varied the words, and often, ostensibly and ostentatiously, (though, in private they may have spoken more sincerely and made honest confessions even), told their respective disciples, 'What I am teaching is different from all other teachings and quite original.' Human weakness--to afford another illustration of the inseparable duality--'high and noble thought' and 'mean and low motive' side by side!

In Gauda-pada's KArikA-s, the words Buddha, Sambuddha, Pra-buddha, and Prati-buddha occur repeatedly. In two or three places Gautama Buddha is meant certainly; in some others, advanced souls, performing the functions of a Buddha, seem to be referred to, generally (see The Mahatma Letters, pp.43-44, regarding "the last Khobilgan, ... Sang-Ko-pa of Kokonor, XIV century"), in the remainder, only 'wise knowers' are meant. But Vaidika annotators, e.g., ShankarAchArya, explain all in the last sense only.

The Beyond-the-Two

As regards the inclusion of both pratyag-Atma and mUla-pRkrti in param-Atma, viShNu purANa, says,

प्रवृतिर्या मया आख्याता, व्यक्त-अव्यक्त-स्वरूपिणि ।
पुरुषश्चापि, अभौ एतौ, लियेते परमात्मनि ॥

pravRutiryA mayA AkhyAtA, vyakta-avyakta-svarUpiNi |
puruShashchApi, abhau etau, liyete paramAtmani ||

GItA says,

प्रकृतिं पुरुषं चैव विद्धि अनादि उभौ अपि ।
परमात्मा इति चापि उक्तो देहेअस्मिन् पुरुषः परः॥

prakRutiM puruShaM chaiva viddhi anAdi ubhau api |
paramAtmA iti chApi ukto deheasmin puruShaH paraH|| (13.19-22)

द्वौ इमौ पुरुषौ लोके, क्षरः न अक्षरः एव च ।
उत्तमः पुरुषस्तु अन्यः परमात्मा इति उदाहृतः॥

dvau imau puruShau loke, kSharaH na akSharaH eva cha |
uttamaH puruShastu anyaH paramAtmA iti udAhRutaH|| (15.16-17)

"prakRti and puruSha (pratyag-Atma), both, are latent in param-Atma. The former is changeful; the latter, changeless; the third, param-Atma, is the highest, including both and distinguishable from each."

A Sufi's Testimony to the Distinctionless

Some beautiful lines by the famous Persian Sufi poet and philosopher, Maulana Rumi, on the disappearance, during slumber, of all time and space and motion, illustrate what has been said on the subject, in the text above.

Shab, ze zindan, be-khabar zindaniyan;
Shab, ze daulat, be-khabar sultaniyan;
Nai gham o andesha-e sud o ziyari;
Nai khayale in fulan o an fulari:
Hal-e a'rif in buwad be-khvftb ham.

(I have not properly accented the Persian text.--sd)

"Oblivious is the prisoner of his chains;
Oblivious in the monarch of his wealth;
The tradesman, of his losses and his gains;
The sick man, of his torment of ill-health;
And every one, of this, that, great and small;
When they sleep as the dead, at dead of night.
The wise man who has seen the Self in all,
Oblivious is of all, e'en in daylight.'

*** *** ***

 

[saidevo]

adhyAtmavidyA in Synthesis: 9. 'dvam-dvam'--The Relative: pratyag-Atma--Self
pratyag-Atma

dvam-dvam means 'two-and-two', the paired, the double.

पराञ्चि खानि व्यतृणत् स्वयम्भूः, तस्मात् पराङ् पश्यति न अन्तरात्मन् ।
कश्चिद् धीरः प्रत्याग्-आत्मानं एक्षद् आवृत्त चक्षुर्, अमृतत्वं इच्छन् ॥

parA~jchi khAni vyatRuNat svayambhUH, tasmAt parA~g pashyati na antarAtman |
kashchid dhIraH pratyag-AtmanaM ekShad AvRutta chakShur, amRutatvaM ichChan ||
-- kaThA upaniShad 2.1.1

"The Self-born pierced the senses outwards; therefore the soul looketh outwards, not inwards. One resolute one, here and there, turneth his vision inwards, desirous of immortality, determined to achieve it, resolved to conquer Death; and he then beholdeth, and identifieth himself with, pratyag-Atma, the Deathless Inner Self."

AHAM, I, Self, in the great logion, is pratyag-Atma.

अ, a, is the first letter of the saMskRta alphabet, and प, ha, the last; therefore the two together, between them, exhaust all the contents of all possible 'experience', which can be possibly expressed by all the letters of the alphabet, i.e., language, and which is all overshadowed by the transiency, perishingness, negation, that is indicated by the म्, m.

Therefore, अ-ह-म् are the appropriate vocal symbol of the I, which is the only 'expcriencer', in whom alone all experience, with its negation, is.

ह, ha, also stands for the AkAsha-tattva, the substrate of sound, and the first material manifestation and sheath or body of conscious life, in this solar system at least, according to the purANas; and it therefore appropriately takes the place, in the name of the individual ego, which is occupied by ह, u, in that of the Absolute Ego.

अकारः सर्ववर्णाग्रयः प्रकाशः परमेश्वरः ।
आध्यम् अन्त्येन संयोगाढ् ’अहम्’ इत्येव जायते ॥

akAraH sarvavarNAgrayaH prakAshaH parameshvaraH |
Adhyam antyena saMyogADh 'aham' ityeva jAyate ||
--Nandik-eshvara-kArikA 4

pratyag-Atma is the inward, abstract, universal Self or Spirit, eternal Subject, wherein all jIvas, individual, particular, discrete spirits, selves, or subjects, inhere as whirlpools in the ocean, as whirl-winds in the air, as vortices in ether, as points in space.

bhrama, bhrAnti, is one of the names for the 'illusion', the 'appearance without reality', of the World-Process; a sort of anagram of 'Brahman', and means 'turning round and round', as the opposite of the Moveless.

This circling bhrama of the World-Process is visible even to the physical eye, and requires no difficult thinking. The earth, the moon, the planets, suns, stars, all revolve; the seasons, the biological functions, psychological, political, economical, social, historical phenomena--all observe cyclical periodicity, which takes on the form of spirals, for reasons explained later on in the text.

The Self 'makes-believe'; It believes 'as if' It is 'this, that, and the other not-Self'; and then, discarding the mask, It comes back into It-Self.

It pervades them all, as the genus pervades all individuals. It is all those individuals. The 'appearance' of separateness, individuation, differentiation, is caused by matter, mUla-prakRti, as will appear later.

In itself, it is the avyakta, the unmanifest, unspecialised, unindividualised; sheathed in buddhi or mahat, universal mind, (corresponding to the connotation of the plural and yet unbreakably unitive, connective, collective 'we'), it becomes the supra-conscious, out of which emerge and into which merge back again, all vyaktis, individuals, manifest consciousnesses, particular minds, manas-es, (corresponding to the singular and separative 'I').

Brahman with and witihout Attributes

It is the One, eka, in a special degree. It is the essence, source, and substratum of all similarity, sameness, continuity, unity, all oneness. It is Ishvara in the abstract sense, the one Ishvara of all particular Ishvaras--their Self, as also the Self, and as much so, of the jIvas that have not yet arrived at the state of Ishvara-hood.

It is sometimes called the mAyA-shaba1am Brahman, or saguNam Brahman, Brahman conjoined with attributes, enwrapped in, coloured with, mAyA. The upaniShads mostly describe it, this pratyag-Atma, and, leading the enquirer to it, finally state that it is identical with Brahman.

Such aphoristic utterances, apparently, have led to the confusion which seems to prevail at the present day amongst the Vedantis of the various schools, as to the relation between pratyag-Atma and param-Atma, or Brahman. The following great words of the upaniShads refer to the pratyag-Atma:

• "Unmoving, it outstrippeth the wind; the gods themselves may not attain to it; it goeth beyond all limitations; by knowledge of it, the jIva attains to the (first) peace of unity;

• "it is the white, the bodiless, the pure, the Self-born, itself uncaused and changeless, and causing all things else and all their changes, smaller than the smallest, yet vaster than the vastest;

A metaphysical axiom in saMskRtam, says, यद् अपारिणामि तद् अकारण--yad apAriNAmi tad akAraNa, 'That which undergoes no change has no cause,' or, more briefly, 'the changeless is causeless'. Hume uses the words, "What is incorruptible must be ungenerable".

• it cannot be spoken of or seen or heard or breathed, but itself speaks and sees and hears and breathes;

• it espouses the enquirer and appears within him of its own law, and may not be taught by another; ever it hides in the cave of the heart; it upholds the three worlds;

• it divides itself and appears in all these endless forms, and yet is best described by saying, 'not this', 'not this'." --(vide Isha, kena and kaThA upaniShads)

And then comes the addition: "This Atma is the Brahman." (mANDukya 2)

The meaning is that the one so described is the Atma, but the same Atma plus the description, viz., 'Not This' that is to say, plus the consciousness that "I am Not Other than I", which consciousness is inseparable from, nay, is the very being, and the whole being, and the whole nature of the Self--is Brahman.

The word pratyag-Atma is not prominently used in the later works on VedAnta, but is of frequent occurrence in bhAgavata eg. 3.35.27, 3.26,27, etc. yoga sUtra 1.29, appears to refer to the same principle under the name of pratyak-chetana. Shankar-Acharya, in his commentaries on kena, 4.6, kaThA, 1.3.11-12, and 2.1.1-2, on Gauda-pAda's's mANDukya kArikA 65 and brahma-sUtra 1.i.1, mentions some other aspects, and even senses, of it. Words often put on new meanings, as souls do new bodies.

This pratyag-Atma is the true nitya, the constant, the fixed, the eternal, kUTastha-nitya, the changelessly and movelessly permanent; as opposed to pariNAmi-nitya, the changefully persistent and ever-lasting, the sempiternal.

While the Absolute may be said to be beyond Eternity as well as Time--or rather to include them both as Eternity plus Time, seeing that Eternity is opposed to Time, and the Absolute is not opposed to anything else and outside of it, but contains all opposites within itself--the word Eternal, as opposed to Temporal, may properly be assigned to the pratyag-Atma in its abstract aspect. As such it is ever complete and undergoes no change, but is the substratum and support of all changing things and of Time, even as an actor of his theatrical attires.

Slumber Knows 'No-Thing'

For concrete illustration, take the case of suShupti, sound slumber, awaking from which a person says: 'I slept well, I knew nothing.' Knowing Nothing, i.e., the Not-Self, he was out of Time literally, he was at complete rest in the Eternal, wherein he felt perfect repose after the day's turn of fatiguing work; whereout he comes back again into Time and to the cognition of some-things, when the restlessness of desire for the experiences of samsAra again overpowers him.

The words of the Yoga-system, for the repose and the restlessness mentioned in the text, are nirodha, and vyutthAna, restraint and 'uprising', retirement and enterprise, inhibition and exhibition, obliviscence and reminiscence, unmanifest consciousness or sub-consciousness or dormant memory and manifest consciousness, rest and work, fatigue and activity, sleep and wakefulness.

The further special meaning of suShupti, the meaning of sleep, as of death, may appear later. In the present connection, it is enough to refer to this one aspect of it, and to point out that the inner significance of the expression, 'the Self knows no-thing during suShupti', is that It, in that condition, positively knows what is technically called No-Thing i.e., the Not-Self as a whole; for the potency, the necessity, of the Being of the Self maintains constantly, before or within that Self, in one unbroken act or fact of consciousness, this No-thing, i.e., No-particular-thing but mere general This-ness or pure Not-Self.

In other words, jIva, in the moment of suShupti, passes almost entirely--(since, strictly speaking, it cannot pass quite entirely, for reasons that will appear on studying the nature of the jIva)--out of the region of the many experiences of particular not-selves, of successive somethings; passes into the other side, the other facet (and yet not other but rather all-including aspect) of that region, viz., into the region of the Single, underlying, ever-present, One Experience, One Negating Consciousness, in the universal Self, of the pseudo-universal Not-Self. That jIva does not pass entirely out of the state of awareness or 'experience', out of a consciousness which is its very nature and essence, is the reason why the thread and continuity of its identity reappears unbroken after the soundest slumber.

Three Names of Self

As with reference to Time, the Self obtains the name of the Eternal, Nitya, coexistently present at every point of Time--for all the endlessly successive points of time are coexistent to, and in, its eternal and universal all-embracing consciousness, Now;

so, with reference to Space, Its name is Vi-bhu, pervasive-being, infinite, unextended, or extensionless;

and, again with reference to Motion, Its name is Sarva-VyApi, all-permeating, Omnipresent, the simultaneously present at every point of space; for all the countlessly coexistent points of Space are simultaneously present in that same consciousness, in one point, Here.

Introspection on the nature of sound Sleep is useful for understanding the nature of Space as of Time. In sound sleep we lose consciousness of Motion, Time, Space, all. (Thus, a person falling sound asleep when his train is standing at one station, and waking up when it is again standing at another, cannot say whether the train has moved at all and how long in time and how far in space he has slept). In slumber we 'bathe', are immersed in, Brahman, and are 'renewed'.

With reference to Motion, its best name seems to be kUTa-stha, rock-seated, or avi-kArl, or apariNaamI, un-changing, the fixed, or, again, antar-yAmi the inner watcher or ruler.

Why Movement within Brahman, and Why Brahman at all?

As regards what has been said above about Atma plus 'Not This', an earnest student and scholar wrestled with the idea for long. His recurring difficulty was: "Why should not Brahman remain pure consciousness; why should there be in It the necessity of a denial of another, and so movement?"

Another might take the next step further in the same direction and ask: "Why should there be any Brahman at all? Why not let there be Nothing only?"

The case of BhushuNDi questioning MArkaNDeya, in the purANas, is similar. More preparation and practice in meditation is needed to realise the simple truth. A study of the Time and Space and Motion experiences, of dreams and reveries and flights of even waking but rapt and absorbing imagination, is exceedingly helpful, nay necessary; and the absence of all such experiences in deep sleep should also be carefully pondered on at the same time. Until the opposition between Time and Eternity is realised, the difficulty about movement and change will continue. The yoga-vAsiShTha stories are very helpful in this reference.

The whole point is that time and movement are within, and negated by, the Eternity of the Moveless All-Consciousness.

The questions at the outset of this note may be more directly dealt with, once again, thus: The reply is by a counter query--What do you understand by pure consciousness? Is not pure consciousness==the denial of impure consciousness? How can you talk and think and know at all of the pure, except by at the same time opposing it to the impure?

And why do you use the word remain? Is it not that you have at the back of your mind the idea of pure consciousness persisting from one moment of time to another, and then to another, and so on endlessly? But successive moments of time cannot be distinguished in pure consciousness. Successive 'impure consciousness', i.e., particular, definite experiences, sensations, thoughts, emotions, volitions, movements in short, mark and make the successive moments of time and points of space; (the words to us may be added, but they are perfectly superfluous and useless, for of to others in the strict sense we have no notion and cannot speak).

(Identifying ourselves with them by turns, we can see that) one cycle of a conscious sun absorbed in the act of rolling may be as one circuit of a race-course by a horse though in human count, the former covers millions of years and billions of miles, and the latter a single minute and about half a mile. Each is just one mind-filling experience to its experiencer, the equivalent of, so to say, one moment of time. The next run will make the next moment; and so on. When there are no such 'impure consciousnesses' there can be no 'remaining'.

The next question, "Why not let there be Nothing?" contains its own answer. Surely let there be-Nothing, by all means. But Brahman is just this be-nothing, be-no-thing, is-not-this. This is not quibbling. It is perfectly serious. We cannot think or talk of nothing without also thinking and talking of being; and the two together, at once, are Brahman.

If you mean-by the words, "Why not let there be nothing?", only the question "Why are there any changing things at all?", then the whole preceding text is an attempt to answer this very question. If you mean "Why is there any unchanging thing?", then the answer, already given in the text also, is, again, "A why is not possible to ask, and cannot be asked, with regard to what is clearly recognised as really unchanging."

*** *** ***

 

[saidevo]

Two Triads of Attributes

Out of the relation of the Self to the Not-Self, as embodied in the logion, there arises a Triplicity of Attributes in both.

• The triune nature of the Absolute is the one constant and timeless 'moment' thereof which contains within it three incessant moments (movements, momentums) of Time, viz., Past, Present and Future;

• and this imposes severally on Self and Not-Self, three guNas--attributes, functions, properties, or qualities.

Compare the verse quoted from jnAna-garbha in the foot-note at p.21 of shiva-sUtra-vimarshinI, edited and published by Mr.J.C.Chatterji, in 1911, for the Kashmir State Series of Texts.

क्रम-त्रय-समाश्रय-व्यतिकरेण या संततं ।
क्रम-त्रितय-लंघनं विदधति विभाति उच्चकौः ।
क्रमैकवपुर् अक्रमप्रकृतिर् एव या शोभते ।
करोमि ह्रृदि ताम् अहं भगवतिं परां संविदम् ॥

krama-traya-samAshraya-vyatikareNa yA saMtataM |
krama-tritaya-laMghanaM vidadhati vibhAti ucchakauH |
kramaikavapur akramaprakRutir eva yA shobhate |
karomi hrRudi tAm ahaM bhagavatiM parAM saMvidam ||

"I invoke, in the heart, the Goddess Consciousness, of supreme perfections, whose manifest body is the triple succession, and whose inner Nature or Spirit is successionlessness."

This work and some others belonging to the Kashmir School of Shaivism, which have become available since the publication of the first edition of this work and of the first volume of the praNava-vAda, show that that school has many ideas in common with these.

A learned friend has referred me to the definition of Shakti, which appears in the commentary by Yoga-rAja on Abhinava-gupta's paramArtha-sAra, kArikA 4, as niShedha-vyApAra-rUpA shaktiH which, if the context allows, and if it is a definition, can only mean that "the nature of Shakti is to operate as negation"; see ch. xi infra and praNava-vAda, I.53, etc.

chid-sat-Ananda as jnAna-kriyA-IchChA

These three inseparable 'moments' in the Absolute may be thus distinguished:

• (a) The 'I' holds the 'Not-I' before itself, and, so facing it, denies it, i.e., cognises Not-Self's non-entity, its nothingness. This face-to-face-ness constitutes the moment of Cognition, including sub-divisions to appear later.

• (b) This cognition of Not-Self by Self is due to, and is of the nature of, a self-definition by Self, a constant definition of its own nature to It-Self as being actually different from all Not-Self, from all things other than the pure Self, which things might possibly be regarded as identical with itself. Implied therefore in this Self-consciousness is the Action of an 'identification' and then a 'separation' of Self with and from Not-Self. This is the moment of Action, having its subdivisions also.

• (c) The third moment is that which intervenes between the other two, the inner condition, so to say (for there is no real distinction of inner and outer here), of the 'I', its tendency or Desire, between the holding of the 'Not-I' before itself, on the one hand, and its movement into or out of it, on the other. This third moment, of Desire, also has subdivisions, to be developed later.

These three moments manifest in the individual jiva as jnAna, kriyA, and ichChA respectively. They will be treated of in detail further on.

jnAnaM, icChA, kriyA--The English words 'know, con, ken, cognise', 'create' and 'wish' are apparently derived from (probably etymologically the same) SaMskRta roots, viz., 'jna', 'kr', and 'ish', respectively.

Here it is enough to say that these three moments in the Absolute Brahman appear in the universal pratyag-Atma as the three attributes of chit, sat, and Ananda, respectively, which are the seeds, principia, possibilities and potencies, universal and abstract aspects, of what in the individual jIva manifest as jnAna, kriyA and ichChA, i.e., cognition, action, desire.

In current VedAnta works, the meaning, as generally accepted, of sat, chit, and Ananda, is explained to be being, consciousness, and bliss respectively. This is not incorrect in itself, but is misleading and vague; it certainly does not bring out the characteristic significance of each.

The correspondence between the two triplets, mentioned here, which at the time this was written was only a guess based upon indications in current SaMskRta works, was afterwards amply confirmed by the praNava-vAda. Also, subsequently, I have found a definite statement of it, though indirectly, in the bhumikA or Introduction to guptavatI tika[/i] on durgA-sapta-shatI:

ज्ञानोच्छाक्रियाणां व्यष्टीनां
महासरस्वति-महाकालि-महालक्ष्मीरिति नामांतराणि ।

j~jAnochChAkriyANAM vyaShTInAM
mahAsarasvati-mahAkAli-mahAlakShmIriti nAmAMtarANi |

'mahA-SarasvatI, mahA-KaLI, mahA-LakShmI are only other names for (the powers of) cognition, desire, and action.

And again:

महासरस्वति, चिते!, महालक्ष्मि, सदात्मके!,
महाकालि, आनंदरूपे!, त्वत्तत्त्वज्ञानसिद्धये,
अनुसंदध्महे, चंडि!, वयं त्वां हृदयांबुजे!

mahAsarasvati, chite!, mahAlakShmi, sadAtmake!,
mahAkAli, AnaMdarUpe!, tvattattvaj~jAnasiddhaye,
anusaMdadhmahe, chaMDi!, vayaM tvAM hRudayAMbuje!

"O ChaNDi! that art mahA-SarasvatI or chit, mahA-LakShmI or sat, and mahA-KaLI or Ananda, we contemplate thee in the lotus ot the heart, in order to achieve knowledge of Thy essential being."

• sat, 'being', is in a special sense and degree, the principle in consciousness of act-ual (self-) assert-ion and (other-) denial, act-ual identification and separation, making and unmaking; it corresponds to kriyA, which alone gives or takes away existence, i.e., manifest and particularised being.

• chit, 'consciousness' in its special aspect of cognition, is the mere holding before oneself of a not-self and ignoring it, denying it, knowing it to be not; it corresponds to jnAna, which enables a thing to be known as existent or non-existent, true or false.

• Ananda, the inner condition of the Self between cognition and action, is that principle of consciousness which connects the other two, is the basis of desire, ichChA, which leads the jIva from knowledge into action.

• That which in the Universal, All-embracing, Omnipotent is Ananda, 'bliss', the fulfilment, or rather fulfilled condition, of all desires and wants, is the Eternal want of want, that appears in the individual as joy after the fulfilment of a particular want, craving, desire, ichChA.

• What, in the Infinite, All-judging, Omniscient, is Chit, consciousness, the fulfilled condition of all-knowing, is the denial of the possibility of all not-selves, is the simultaneous positing and denying of all else than Self; that appears in the limited jIva as partial knowledge, jnAna, of thing after thing, half-truth, the error or a-vidyA of assertion, and then the remaining, niShedha-sheSha, critical, 'well-judged', vidyA, supplementary and completing truth, of the denial of things, 'all is vanity', 'vortices of nothing', 'much ado about nothing'.

• Finally, that which in the Motionless and Changeless, Omnipresent, is Perfect and Peaceful Being, sat. Being everywhere, that same appears, in the finite person, as effort to be, to exist, in place after place, time after time, i.e., is action, kriyA, followed by rest. (Be-ing is to 'be-in-Self'; ex-istence is 'out-istence').

All Six Inseparable

It should be borne in mind that these three aspects, sat, chit, and Ananda, are not prior in time to kriyA, jnAna, and ichChA; nor are they in any sense external causes or creators of the latter.

They are co-eval with each other in their universal and unmanifested aspect, and are identical with the second triplet, which is only their particular and manifested aspect;

even as universal and particular, abstract and concrete, substance and attribute, plural and singular, whole and parts, We and I, may be said to be identical.

The two cannot be separated, but only distinguished, as before pointed out.

• pratyag-Atma cannot and does not exist without and apart from jIvas, and jIvas cannot and do not exist without and apart from pratyag-Atma.

• But while in pratyag-Atma, consciousness is Self-Consciousness, which, against the foil of the Not-Self, is Self-action or Self-assertion, Self-knowledge, and Self-desire or Self-enjoyment, all in one, all evenly balanced and equal, none greater than any other, all merging into each;

• so that pratyag-Atma is often exclusively referred to in the upaniShads by only one of the three attributes, as only Ananda, or chit, or sat or Ananda-ghana, chid-ghana, sad-ghana;

• jIva is a compound of jnAna, ichChA and kriyA, which, by the necessary fact of their confinement to particulars, realise their inseparable contemporaneousness only in an endless succession; so that they rotate one after the other, two being always latent, but never absent, while one is patent.

But, by predominance of one function extending over a long period in a lifetime, individual jIvas become distinguished, despite the perpetual rotation of all three, as 'men of knowledge', 'men of action', and 'men of desire', or as men of undifferentiated, unskilled, little-skilled work.

How and why three moments come to be distinguishable in what is partless, will appear on fully considering the nature of the second factor in the triune Absolute. (See the next chapter).

Universal Self, Impersonal

Such then is sat-chid-Ananda, saguNa-brahman, having three attributes as constituent principles of its being, three potentialities which are necessarily present in it with reference to the necessary nature of its two co-factors in the Absolute.

But we see clearly all the while that it is not personal, not individual, not some one that is separate from other ones, not the single ruler of any one particular kosmic system;

but is Universal Self which is the very substratum of, and is immanent in, all particular Ishvaras, i.e., jIvas risen to be rulers of world-systems and all jIvas therein; (Chiefs of hosts of Planetary spirits).

The technical definition (of Ishvara) in SaMskRta is,

कर्त्तुम् अकर्त्तुम् अन्यथा वा कर्त्तुं समर्थः ईश्वरः ।

karttum akarttum anyathA vA karttuM samarthaH IshvaraH |

"He who can do, or not do, or do otherwise as he pleases."

Etymologlcally,

ईशते इति ईश्वरः

Ishate iti IshvaraH

"he who rules is master, the sovereign".

In the full sense, only the Universal Self is Ishvara. In the comparative sense, infinite numbers of jIvas, at an infinite number of stages and grades, are Isbvaras, lords, masters.

A 'lord of men', a chief, a king, is a nar-eshvara. Technically, the three Rulers, or, rather, the Triple or Tri-Une Ruler, of a solar system. BrahmA, ViShNu, and Shiva, are Ishvaras regarded as Three; they are param-eshvara regarded as a Tri-Unity.

Why Triplicity of Attributes

The triplicity of attributes in the Self is a reflection of the triuneness of the Absolute:

• Self, with reference to the Self, whose very being is constant awareness of It-self, is chit;

• with reference to the Not-Self, which it posits, therefore creates, i.e., gives to it the appearance of existence, and denies, therefore destroys, becomes sat;

• with reference to the Negation, ceasing from the restless turmoil of the Many, it shows forth Ananda and the bliss of peace.

Worship of pratyag-Atma and Its Various Aspects

This pratyag-Atma is in a sense capable of being worshipped. Worship and devotion may be directed to it in the shape

• of constant study and re-cognition of its nature;
• of constant desire to see and feel, by universal love, its presence everywhere, and as all selves, and in all not-selves;
• of constant endeavour to realise such presence by acts of compassion and helpfulness and service.

Such is the worship of the Atma by the jIva who, having finished (for that cycle) his journey on the path of pravRtti, pursuit, marked out by the first half of the logion, is now treading (for that cycle) the return-path of nivRtti, renunciation, which is laid down by the second half of that same logion.

To such a jIva, the special Ishvara of his own particular world-system

• is the higher individuality of which his own individuality is, in one respect, an integral part;
• is the father of his material sheaths;
• and, in another aspect, the high ideal of renunciation and self-sacrifice whom he is lovingly and devotedly to serve and closely to imitate, as far as may be, within his own infinitesimal sphere.

Students who cannot yet quite clearly grasp the nature of the relation between Self and Not-Self in its purity and nakedness, cannot yet clearly distinguish pratyag-Atma from its veil of mUla-prakRti, but, still, more or less vaguely, realise the universality of Self, who are in short at the stage of vishisht-advaita-- such students worship the particular Ishvara of their world-system in a vaguely universalised aspect.

Still other jIvas, at the stage of dvaita and of the theory of creation, worship only and wholly the individual ruler of their world-system, or a subordinate deity, regarding him or her or It as the extra-cosmical creator, final cause and explanation, of the universe.

Absolute Brahman transcends and includes all worship.

****************************************

 

[saidevo]

adhyAtmavidyA in Synthesis: 10. 'dvam-dvam'--The Relative: mUla-prakRti--Not-Self
mUla-prakRuti or Matter: Not-Self

WE have dealt with the first factor of the triune Absolute, namely the Self. The second factor is the Not-Self. Its many names, each significant of a special aspect, are:

• an-AtmA, Not-Self;
• a-chit, the non-conscious;
• an-Rta, the false;
• jaDa, the non-intelligent, non-sentient, inert;
• nAnA, the Many;
• jneya, the knowable;
• viShaya, the Object;
• bheda-mUla, root of separateness;
• mUla-prakRti, Root-Nature;
• pradhAna, the chief, the root-base, of all the elements, wherein they all 'subsist';
• mAtrA, the measurer, the measure-setter, the delimiter, the de-fin-ing or finitising principle, the mother, Matter; and
• a-vyakta, the Unmanifest.

mUla-prakRti and pradhAna are specially prominent in sAMkhya, and of frequent occurrence elsewhere too.

अनात्मा, अचित्, अनृत्, जड, नाना, ज्ञेय, विषय, भेदमूल, मूल प्रकृति, प्रधान, मात्रा

Each name is significant of an important aspect.

The word mAtrA has, regrettably, dropped out of current use somehow; it deserves restoration, being etymologically the same as the well known English word 'matter'.

It is used in this sense in the bhavad-gItA:

मात्रा स्पर्शास्तु, कौन्तेय! शीतोष्ण सुखदुःखदाः ।

mAtrA sparshAstu, kaunteya! shItoShNa sukhaduHkhadaaH |

2.14: Contacts with the objects of the senses, O Kaunteya, give rise to cold and hot, pleasure and pain."

The word avyakta is not specific to the Not-Self, it should be noted; it is used for pratyag-Atma, or abstract Self, also for Not-Self, and also for mahat-buddhi of sAmkhya, the 'great' diffused Intelligence, universal or sub-supra-Conscious Mind, unindividualised by a sheath and un-particularised or unfocussed by an act of attention.

mahAn-AtmA also occurs, now and then, in the sense of Self plus this Universal Mind. Sometimes AkAsha is also called avyakta, as a substitute for root-matter or 'This', which is the indispensable second basis of universal mind, the first being Self.

The etymology of pra-kRti, is thus explained in devI-bhAgavata, 9.1:

प्रकृष्टवाचकः प्रश्च, कृतिश्च सृष्टिवाचकः ।
सृष्टौ प्रकृष्टा या देवी, प्रकृतिः सा प्रकीर्त्तिता ।
गुणो सत्वे प्रकृष्टे च प्रशब्दो वर्तते श्रुतः ।
मध्यमे रजसि कृश्च, तिशब्द तमसि स्मृतः ॥

prakRuShTavAchakaH prashcha, kRutishcha sRuShTivAchakaH |
sRuShTau prakRuShTA yA devI, prakRutiH sA prakIrttitA |
guNo satve prakRuShTe cha prashabdo vartate shrutaH |
madhyame rajasi kRushcha, tishabda tamasi smRutaH ||

"9.1: The first letter indicates greatness; the next two, activity, creation, emanation; also, the three letters respectively mean the three guNas, sattva. rajas, and tamas."

Not-Self All-ways Contrary to Self

This Not-Self is by the Necessity of Negation of it by Self, which Necessity is the very Nature of the Absolute--the opposite of Self, in every possible respect and aspect; as is indicated in the fact that some of its most characteristic names are made up by prefixing a negative to the names of Self.

Because of this fact,

• as the essential characteristic of Self is Unity, the very essence of Not-Self is Manyness, separateness; and
• as the marks of Self are Universality and unlimitedness, so the marks of the Not-Self are limitedness, Particularity, ever-specifiedness.

As Fichte has said (The Science of Knowledge, p.83 -- Kroeger's English translation): "All reality is in consciousness, and of this reality that part is to be ascribed to the Non-Ego which is not to be ascribed to the Ego, and vice versa ... The Non-Ego is what the Ego is not, and vice versa."

Or, better, as reported by Schwegler (History of Philosophy, p.246): "Whatever belongs to the Ego, the counterpart of that must, by virtue of simple contraposition, belong to the Non-Ego."

This characteristic consequence of the opposition of Self and the Not-Self should be carefully considered, together with other aspects of the Nature of the Absolute. Solution of the various difficulties, alluded to before from time to time, hinges upon it.

• Because nothing particular can be said of Ego, therefore everything particular, all possible particulars, must be assigned to Non-Ego.

• But yet again, lest the totality of these particulars should become a fact different from the Non-Ego instead of identical with it, even as positive is different from negative, these particulars, are paired off into opposites.

• These opposites, again, because particular and definite, are more than presence and absence; both factors have the appearance of presence, positiveness, as debt and loan, as pleasure and pain. The pain of a debt is as much a positive burden on the consciousness of the debtor, as the pleasure of a loan is a weight on that of the creditor.

(See yoga-bhaAShya, 2.5; "a-vidyA is not merely non-knowledge but 'opposite' or wrong knowledge, as a-mitra, non-friend, un-friendly, is not merely 'absence of friend' but a positive foe.")

Mind, the Only Maker-Unmaker

When we are dealing with the ultimate universal and pseudo-universal, viz., Self and Not-Self, Being and Nothing, then even presence and absence are adequately opposed; it is enough to prefix a negative particle to Self and Being.

But when we are in the region of particulars, this is not so:

• positive cold, in order to be neutralised, must be opposed by positive heat, and not merely by no-cold:
• a positive debt is not sufficiently set off and balanced by a no-debt, but only by an asset;
• plus is not nullified by zero, but by minus;
• a colour is not abolished by no-colour, but by another equally positive complementary colour.

It should also be borne in mind, in this connection, that the positiveness of particulars, the reality of concrete things, is, after all, not so very definite and indefeasible as it seems at first sight, but on the contrary, a very elusive and illusive fact.

In the ultimate analysis its whole essence is found to be nothing else than consciousness; the more consciousness we put into a thing, the more real it becomes, and vice versa.

That a house, a garden, an institution, falls out of repair, or order, and gradually disappears, loses its reality, its existence, if it is neglected by the proprietor or manager; that is to say, if the latter withdraws his consciousness from it; is only an illustration of this on the physical plane.

The essential fact is always the same, consciousness upholding itself as well as its object, though the details differ; thus, to maintain its objects on the physical plane, consciousness employs the bahish-karaNa, the 'outer', or physical, senses, organs, instruments and means, for repairs, etc.; while on the mental plane it employs the antaH-karaNa,' the 'inner instrument'.

As in the case of the individual and his house, on the small scale, so, on the large scale, when BrahmA 'falls asleep' and withdraws his consciousness from it, his brahm-ANda, world-egg or system, disappears.

Like so many other facts and laws stated by SaMskRta metaphysic, these 'world-eggs' or 'eggs of Brahman, the Immense, the Infinite', are literal facts, which need no abstruse science or elaborate thinking to perceive, but can be veritably seen by physical eyes. Earth Moon, Sun, all the 'orbs' and 'globes' of Heaven, i.e.. the Immense Firmament, Boundless Space, are quite obviously 'eggs' of the Infinite.

We should remember here that the arrangement of materials which is the house, the garden, etc.,

• is, for all purposes, the creation of the maker's individual consciousness,
• and that the other arrangements of material which he uses as senses, means and instruments, etc., are also evolved and created by his life or consciousness;

(that functions create organs, and not organs, functions, is becoming quite a commonplace of at least one school of advanced science now--Compare ChAndogya, 8.12.5, "The Self ideating or imagining itself as hearing, seeing, etc., became the ear, the eye, etc.");

• and finally that, that material, ultimately the Not-Self, over which he as an individual has no power, is the creation of, the result of positing or affirmation by, the Universal Consciousness, the Self.

If these facts are duly taken into account, then the presence of all possible kinds of mutually-destructive pairs of 'reals', 'concretes', 'particulars', within, and as making up the total of, Not-Self, equivalent to Nothing or Non-being in its totality, will not appear altogether incomprehensible.

All Creation is Pro-creation

All creation is a continuation of self. No creation is possible without identification of the producer with the product, (comparatively).

Every creation is, more or less, a pro-creation, forth-emanation, (as of a child). It is positing of the creat-ure, directly or indirectly, as 'I-(am)-this'. 'My' is the (comparatively) indirect form of positing; it is only a lesser degree of 'I'.

All dissolution is, similarly, denying that identity; 'I-not-this', or 'not-mine-this'.

However distant from me, and apparently indifferent to me, yet still the stars, the planets, the earth's poles, the earth's centre--are all 'I' or 'my', or 'not so', though very vaguely. Whatever is of 'interest' to 'me', is related to me in terms of love or hate; therefore, in terms of 'I' and 'mine', aham-ta and mama-ta, or of 'not I' and 'not mine', na-aham and na-mama.

The Veda hymns, known as cha-ma-ka and na-ma-ka, vividly express this idea: 'The Sun is Mine, the Moon is Mine, Indra is Mine, the Wind is Mine', etc., and again, 'Not Mine, Not Mine'.

To bring home the fact that 'mine' is only a continuation of 'I', consider this: a person 'creates' a house for him-self; he feels and wishes, 'aham gRhI syAm', 'May I become a house-man', (hus-band, houseowner, house-dweller).

This feeling, this consciousness, converts Arambha into adhy-A-ropa or adhy-Asa; changes creation into self-transformation (which includes pari-NAma);

It transforms the 'potter' into the theatrical 'actor'. All authors, more or less, put themselves into their creations; authors of even science-books; much more of novels and dramas. Literal and visible proof, of owner and house being identical, are shell-fish, molluscs. In later, higher, forms of life, this house becomes more and more, and then quite, separate, physically only.

The cause, the force, which creates a book, a machine, a state, an empire, is the ideation-and-will, of some individual self, 'May I be an author, a machine-inventor, a statesman, an emperor'. Birds fly with wings, fishes swim with fins and tails, which are (part of) them-selves; men fly and swim with aeroplanes and ships and submarines which are theirs.

yoga-siddhas may re-place the machines which are theirs, by organs which would be (parts of their bodies) them-selves; as telescopes and microscopes may be replaced by keener eyes and clairvoyance. The evolutionist (Lamarckian) view, that 'functions create organs'; the poet's conviction, that 'the Spirit's plastic stress' shapes all things; are only corollaries of the above.

Incidentally, for a very entertaining exposition and defence of Lamarckism or neo-Lamarckism as against Darwinism or neo-Darwinism, the reader may see Bernard Shaw's Preface to Back to Methuselah.

 

[saidevo]

Countless Paired Positives

The negative Not-Self thus appears as a mass of countless paired positives, dvam-dvam, 'two-and-two'.

• These appear as particular and positive when we view each of the two factors of every pair separately, from the standpoint of the limited.

• Yet by the fact of their being paired into opposites, by the affirmation and negation contained in the Absolute, they are always destroying each other by internecine controversy, and thereby always leaving intact and maintaining the negativity of the negative, considered from the standpoint of totality.

In other words, the Whole is the summation, and at the same time the opposite, the abolition and annihilation, of all its parts; as zero is the summation as well as the abolition of all possible plus-figures and all possible minus-figures.

This paired feature of mUla-prakRti is only a reproduction, a reflection, therein, of the essential constitution of the Absolute, the opposition of the primal pair of pratyag-Atma and mUla-prakRti, which is necessarily the supreme archetype and paradigm for all constitutions within it; there being nothing outside it to borrow from.

No Arbitrariness
This being clearly grasped, the famous quill of Krug (p.73 supra) may now be deduced easily. Where everything must be, the quill also may be, nay, shall be; and not only the quill, but the agencies that destroy the quill.

All arbitrariness, all caprice, is done away with by this one statement. Arbitrariness means nothing more nor less than this: one thing more than another, one thing rather than another, without due reason.

Where all are, equally, and none more than another; and, further, where everything is with its opposite, with its negation, with its is not, also, at the same time; there, there is no arbitrariness, no caprice.

Variations 'within' the Unvarying

If we ask, why this particular thing at this particular point of space and time, the reply is:

• In the first place, the particular space and time of the question have no particularity apart from the particular thing which defines them; so that the particular thing and the particular time and space are inseparable, are even indistinguishable, almost; are one thing in fact, and not three.

• In the second place, all possible orders or arrangements, all possible particulars, cannot actually be at the same point of space and time, to one limited jIva; and yet they are all there also, to him, one actually and the rest potentially, to satisfy even such a demand. And they are there also actually, turn by turn, to that same jIva.

• On the other hand, all possible orders and arrangements and things are actually present also at any one point of space and time; but they are so only when we take into consideration all possible constitutions and kinds of jIvas, and see that any one order corresponds to one particular kind of jIva.

Thus, the extreme demand that "everything must be everywhere and always" actually, as it of course is potentially, is also justified and satisfied.

यतावद् एव विज्ञास्यं, तत्त्वविज्ञासुना आत्मनः ।
अन्वयव्यतिरेकाभ्यां, यत् स्यात् सर्वत्र सर्वदा ॥

yatAvad eva vij~jAsyaM, tattvavij~jAsunA AtmanaH |
anvayavyatirekAbhyAM, yat syAt sarvatra sarvadA || --bhAgavata

"The seeker for the Truth of Self, should find out That which is every-where and al-ways. He should do so by anu-aya and vi-ati-reka; by discriminating between what persists and what changes"; i.e., by the method of agreements and differences, or concomitant variations. See pp.22-23 supra.

sarva sarvatra sarvadA | --yoga-vAsiShTha

So far as potential presence is concerned, a biological illustration is supplied by the doctrine of bio-phores, each containing an infinite number of ids or determinants, developing and manifesting by turns.

Compare also Leibnitz, Monadology: "He who sees all, could read in each what is happening everywhere;" and again, "each monad (jIva) is a living mirror of all the universe."

Jevons, in The Principles of Science, describes how each atom is a register of all the happenings of all the universe. " What a wonderful revelation to the historian and artist it would be ... if he could stand in a modern gallery and see artists of all ages and generations at work, or talk to writers, dramatists, and philosophers of all times. Yet this is what the scientist possesses in living intensely active Nature"; The Origin and Nature of Life (Home University Library), pp.71-72.

The word 'gene' is now in vogue in place of Weismann's 'id', but seems to mean much the same. It maybe noted here that such views as Bergson's, of Creative Evolution, and Morgan's, of Emergent Evolution, all assume change, of one sort or another, and do not explain it; while the view, expounded here, explains all possible forms of Change as being always within the Changeless.

Such is the reconciliation of the opposites involved in samsAra, and explanation of its endless flux, its anAdI-pra-vAha, beginningless flow, as well as its ever-completeness and rock-like fixity, kUTa-stha-tA.

The significance of this will appear more and more as we proceed; for while all laws exist and operate and interpenetrate simultaneously and pervasively, they cannot, owing to the limitations of speech, be described simultaneously. "Speech proceeds only in succession," [vAk kila kramavarttinI--yoga-vAsiShTha] like all other activities of the World-Process.

Sempiternity of the Changing: Nothing is Ever Wholly Lost

We see, then, that the negative Not-Self is a mass of positive particulars, and that, at the same time, because of its being in inseparable connection with Self, it necessarily takes on the appearance of the characteristics of Self, and becomes pseudo-eternal, pseudo-infinite, pseudo-unlimited, so that matter appears indestructible through all its changes.

अविप्रणाशः सर्वेषां कर्मणां, इति निश्चयः ।
महाभूतानि नित्यानि, भूताधिपति संश्रयात् ॥
तेषां च नित्यसंवासो, न विनाशो वियुज्यताम् ।
कर्मजानि शरीराणि, शरीर आकृतयः तथा ॥

avipraNAshaH sarveShAM karmaNAM, iti nishchayaH |
mahAbhUtAni nityAni, bhUtAdhipati saMshrayAt ||
teShAM cha nityasaMvAso, na vinAsho viyujyatAm |
karmajAni sharIrANi, sharIra AkRutayaH tathA || --mahAbhArata

"No actions, no body-forms resulting from those actions, no elements, are ever completely annihilated. Because they are connected with, because they are ideated by, the Sovereign Lord of All, the Eternal Self, therefore are they also pseudo-eternal, ever-lasting, sempiternal, seeming to disappear, but remaining in potentio in that Ideator, and therefore also re-appearing, endlessly."

A Sufi mystic, Jili, in his work The Perfect Man, expresses the same fact: 'The existence of God is eternal, and the knowledge (of God) is eternal, and the object of knowledge is inseparable from the knowledge, therefore it is also eternal"; quoted in translation, by R. A. Nicholson, Studies in Islamic Mysticism, p.128.

Though essentially a-sat, Nothing, mUla-prakRti is yet pseudo-Being, i.e., existent, sat; though many, and particular, and changing, yet it has a pseudo-oneness, and a pseudo-universality, and a pseudo-changelessness (of laws, all-ways); though finite, it is also pseudo-infinite; though dying, it is also pseudo-eternal.

It is pseudoeternal, because it is, not only dying, but, ever dying; ever, in order to keep pace, as it must, because of inseparability from it, with the eternal Self. It is pseudo-infinite, because it is, not only finite, but, everywhere finite; everywhere, in order to avoid separation from that same in-finite and omni-present Self from which it may never be separated. The same is the case with all the other characteristics.

 

[saidevo]

Why the Logion must be taken in Parts, as well as in the Whole
Two Parts in the Logion

Let us now pass on to the question why the Legion has to be taken in parts, as well as in the whole.

By opposition to the Unity and unlimitedness of Self, Not-Self is Many and limited. Under these necessary conditions, Self denies Not-Self.

But while pure Non-Being, i.e., the whole of Not-Self, in being denied, and in order to be effectively denied, becomes simultaneously affirmed, and so becomes a multitude of passing and mutually-destructive particulars, any one of these particulars, by the very reason of its being limited, being defined in time and space and motion, is, from its own standpoint, incapable of simultaneous affirmation and denial.

Pure Non-Being may, without objection, be affirmed and denied in the same breath; but a particular limited something, which is a-sat and yet sat, which is sad-asat, existent and non-existent, cannot be both 'simultaneously'. And yet it must be both, for Absolute-Consciousness contains both the affirmation and the negation of it.

Reconciliation of these contradictory necessities, these two antinomies of the reason, the solution of this apparently insuperable logical difficulty, is found in the 'successive' existence and non-existence of each limited something.

• Hence the logion appears (and this appearing is the World-Proces-sion), as divided in two parts, first 'I (am) this', and secondly, '(I) this (am) not'; first affirmation, then negation;

• first the positing by Self of its identity with a possible and therefore actual 'this', a piece of matter, and then the denying of that identity with an impossible and therefore perishing 'this' or piece of matter;

• first birth, then death. This 'succession' is mithyA, mythical, a mere illusion, an appearance; because it is true only from the standpoint of the limited.

Illusion of Succession: Analogy

That the World-Process is an illusion, is, like so many other 'metaphysical' laws and facts, visible even to the 'physical' eyes. That which passes, which is at one moment, and is not the next--how else can it be named and described than as illusion? Does it not violate all the so-called laws of thought?

Science has been described as organised knowledge. But the World-Process is an Organised Process; Nature has an Organic Unity, is a parArtha sanghAta, in the words of sAMkhya, 'an organisation for the sake of the Self'.

Therefore sciences are only descriptions of portions or aspects of the World-Process as so organised. And Metaphysic, the Chief of Sciences, which co-ordinates all the others, is therefore only an accurate description of the essential facts of the World-Process as completely organised and co-ordinated by the Unity of the Self.

Hence the ChAndogya upaniShad (6.1.6), 'Knowledge of the One is knowledge of the Whole'; (see also yoga sUtra, 4.31).

There. is no other mystery than the Mystery of the One Self. The simplest, the nearest, and dearest, is the truest and deepest; as here, so everywhere; as now, so ever; as thus, so al-ways; as the atom, so the solar system; as the microcosm, so the macrocosm,

There is no break in the Law of Analogy, i.e., of Continuity, i.e., of Unity, anywhen and anywhere and anyway. Once this is realised, all facts, happenings, laws, so-called errors and so-called truths, i.e. part-truths, all become self-evident, (veda, 'seen') matters for mere description. There is nowhere any originality or invention...

Pass into the non-limitation of the Self, by turning the consciousness inwards, whenever and wherever you like, and thence into the fullness of the Absolute, and there is no succession. The whole of the limited, past, present, and future, is in that un-conditioned thought at once.

The ever-complete and perfect balance of the Absolute appears, to the limited, and from its own standpoint, as the successive and continuous balanc-ing of things in samsAra.

And this continuity of succession, this perpetual resurrection and rebirth, repeated life and death, this recurrence of existence and non-existence, this Becoming between Being and Nothing, this equivocation between affirmation and denial, may itself be regarded as a third part in the logion; viz., 'I am not this, but am this other this; and not this either, but this other this', and so on, endlessly completing the triplicity which is found every-where because of the triuneness of the Absolute.

Safeguard against Surds: Totality of Pluses and Minuses

But lest this appearance of succession should seem to introduce something new and foreign to the sva-bhAva, the Nature, of the Absolute, the safeguard, already mentioned in other words, is provided.

While each one of a pair of opposites is succeeded in a later time in the same place (or space) by the other, it is also coexisted with in the same time in another place by that other; for the endless limited positives that make up the pseudo-unlimited negativity or non-being of the Not-Self, in order to do so, must be constantly paired as opposites, so that they always counterbalance each other, and so actually leave behind a cipher only, whenever the totality of them may be summed up.

Thus a constant balance too appears in the World-Process, wherein the many coexist with, as well as succeed, each other.

The truth of this may be verified in the daily life of human beings as well as the life of kosmic systems. Life to one means and necessarily implies death to another simultaneously, at the same time, and to that one itself successively, i.e., at a later time. Pleasure to one is pain to another, and, again, to that one, in the same way. So with the rise and decay of the natural kingdoms of minerals, vegetables, animals, men, devas, etc., of human kingdoms or nations, of planets and of solar systems, at the expense and the gain, respectively, of one another.

That this must be so, is due to the fact that the Totality of paired and opposed Matter (positive and negative) is fixed, once for all, as the Whole, by that unconditioned thought or idea which is the Absolute, and cannot newly be added to or taken away from; that Totality being, as said before, always Zero, equal plus and minus.

Matter is thus uncreatable as well as indestructible. Therefore what appears as an increase in one place and moment, is necessarily due to a decrease in another place and moment, and vice versa. This will appear further in treating of the Law of Action and Reaction.

There are some very interesting and suggestive statements in the praNava vAda in the connection, thus. Matter has two kinds, "light atoms" and "dark atoms"; as shakti-energy is "affirmative" and "negative ". In modern scientific writings too there have been speculations about "well-atoms" and "sink-atoms", "light suns" and "dark suns", "vortex-rings" gyrating or spirating in opposite directions, which, when they meet, neutralise each other, and are, to all appearance, annihilated, but still persist in potency, in possibility (and therefore actuality) of revival, as bIja or samskAra.

A friend asked, "With what negative is this positive book to be paired off?" The reply was, "With the things, wind and weather, heat and dust of summer, damp of rains, worms of many kinds, which are slowly disintegrating it, and will complete its 'non-existence' some day. The book has been formed out of elemental material, and has left blanks, emptinesses, in various places, which are constantly calling for a restoration of the status quo.

Vast buildings have been raised in all countries, in the passing centuries; walls and towers, as in Babel, temples and pyramids, as in Egypt, India, Mexico, Peru; more recently, thousand, twelve hundred, thirteen hundred feet high sky-scrapers, like Woolworth and Empire Buildings in New York and Lenin Memorial in Moscow. All have been built with materials taken from various places. The positive hollows left in those spots are the negative opposites of the positive buildings, which are the negative opposites of the positive hollows, in turn.

The forces which raised the buildings are perpetually resisted by the forces which are craving to restore the status quo, to lead back from vai-ShaMya, heterogeneity, to sAmya, sameness, homogeneity. These latter began imperceptible wearing down of the buildings simultaneously with their erection; and have completed, or will complete someday, the levelling down of them and the filling up of the hollows. It is a commonplace of geology that mountains turn into ocean-beds and vice versa, by slow erosions and fillings and liftings, or sudden cataclysms.

Why Recurrent Cycles?

In these facts, coexistent and successsive, combined with the infinity and eternity of Self--against which they are outlined, and which they constantly endeavour to reflect and reproduce in themselves--we find embodied and manifested, continuous movement of all and everything, from place to place and moment to moment; and also recurring return of all and everything, though only in appearance and not in actuality, to the same position (comparatively, never exactly), in coexistent surroundings amidst its companion-objects, and also to the same position in the successive order and arrangement of those objects.

This thought, if properly followed out, explains the

• Why of Recurring Cycles, in individual as well as kosmic life;
• why history is always repeating itself, in the main outlines;
• why every jIva and all jIvas must pass though all experiences and the same experiences, turn after turn;
• how every finite thing, even a passing thought, an atom vibration, the most evanescent phenomenon, is pseudo-infinite and pseudo-eternal, i.e., endless and everlasting;
• why there must be an endlessness of veils upon veils, planes within planes, senses besides senses, and elements after elements;
• why nothing and no one, atom-dust or solar system, is on the whole, really more important than any other;
• why and how the immortality of Self is assured to all; and
• how all are yet always graded to each other and bound up, in ever higher and higher range of Unity, in (every consciousness, because all consciousnesses are equally contained in) the One Consciousness.

In Puranic pictography, this fact of the 'end-less continuous spiral' of the World-Process is described as the 'coils of an-anta-sheSha', the 'ever-unfinished, ever-remaining' Serpent of a thousand heads who bears a world on each head. See the diagram on p.432 of The Secret Doctrine, III. sheSha means 'that which always remains behind as Residuum'; it also means, in nyAya, 'the means which look to an end as their residue'. The word is derived from shiSh, 'to leave a residue; sheShati, 'leaves a remainder'; shiShyate, 'is left behind as remnant'.

 

[saidevo]

Three Mo(ve)ments, Congenial in the Abosolute, but Successive and Synchronous in the Not-Self

The considerations which explain why the logion is taken in two, or rather, three parts, also explain how three moments are distinguishable in the Absolute.

• Indeed, the difference between the three parts and the three moments is only the difference between the third person, on the one hand, and the first and second, on the other; between looking at Self and Not-Self as Being and Nothing, or as 'I' and 'This'.

• The simultaneity of past, present, and future; tbe compression into one point, of behind, here, and before; the absence of all movement; these are congenial to the Whole, but are not possible to and in the part and the particular.

• The positing, the sup-posing (while denying), of Not-Self by Self, the op-posing (while affirming) of Not-Self by Self; the com-posing of (while negating all connection between) the two by means of Negation; these three facts, while simultaneous in the Absolute, where the whole Self deals with the whole Not-Self, cannot be such where a particular, limited, not-self or 'this' is concerned.

• They can appear only in succession: first sup-posing, positing, moment of jnAna; then opposing (after identifying), moment of kriyA; and, intervening between them, or, indeed, enveloping them both and holding them together, com-posing, the moment of ichChA.

• Yet, even while so succeeding one another, these moments cannot, as pointed out in the previous chapter, altogether lose the contemporaneousness which belongs to them by right of being in the timeless and successionless Absolute.

• This synchronousness appears in the fact that when any one comes into the foreground, the other two remain in the background, and that these also come forward, turn by turn; in short, they succeed, not only one another but, each other, and in incessant rotation.

These facts illustrate the metaphysical 'why' of the continuum of consciousness, in one aspect, the theory of which has been propounded by James Ward, Stout, and others in the West.

Thus is the World-Process one vast device, or, rather, one vast mass of countless devices, for perpetual reconciling of the opposed necessities of the reason.

Thing and Thought, Re-al & Idea-l

Another of the more important consequences issuing from the essential nature, the limitedness, the particularity and manyness, of mUla-prakRti, may also be noted.

• The distinctions between thought and thing, ideal and real, abstract and concrete, are all immediately due to this characteristic, and are in reality nothing more than the distinction between whole and part.

• From the standpoint of the whole, the Absolute, or even from that of the universal pratyag-Atma, all possible varieties of Not-Self are 'ideal', are 'thought', are parts of the 'abstract' Not-Self, are thought, by the Self, as negated;

• but each such variety, from its own standpoint, to itself, is 'real', is 'thing', is 'concrete'.

• The present, to that which is present, is the re-al, while the past and the future are idea-1; but to the eternal, wherein past, present, and future are all present, all is ideal, or all real (the name does not matter).

• Because all is present in the pratyag-Atma, therefore memory of the past and expectation of the future become possible in the jIv-AtmA. All this will be discussed more fully, later on, in connection with the nature of 'cognition'.

The Universal Mind of pratyag-Atma is the sub-supra-consciousness of jIvatmA, the basis of its memory and expectation, of chittam, the individual mind, which indeed is the individual jIva (or jIva-atom). chittam is that which chetayati, remembers, looks before and after, is conscious, is aware; it is the limited form of the unlimited chit or chiti.

The Special Attributes of Not-Self

We may now consider those special attributes of Not-Self which stand out with prominence in SaMskRta books. They are sattva, rajas, and tamas.

They correspond exactly to the three attributes of pratyag-Atma, and arise also from the same compelling necessity of the constitution, sva-bhAva, essential Nature, of the Absolute, as described by the Logion. It is unnecessary to repeat here all that has been said in this reference before. It will be enough to say that:

• (a) as sat is the principle of 'action' or activity in Self, so rajas is the corresponding principle in Not-Self, which makes it capable of being acted on, makes it amenable and responsive to all activity, gives it the tendency to active movement, 'mobility or motility';

• (b) as chit is the principle of 'cognition' in the One, so sattva is the principle of 'cognisability' in the Many;

• (c) as Ananda is the principle of 'desire' in the Enjoyer, the Subject, so tamas is the principle of 'desirability' in the enjoyed, the Object.

They correspond, respectively, to what appears in the particular, i.e., manifest matter, as karma--movement, guNa--quality, dravya--substance; and, again, to the etat, the aham, and the na, respectively, in the Absolute.

सात्तिवकस्य ज्ञानशक्ति, राजसस्य क्रियात्मिका ।
द्रव्यशक्तिस्तामसस्य, तिरत्रश्च कथितास्तव ॥

sAttivakasya j~jAnashakti, rAjasasya kriyAtmikA |
dravyashaktistAmasasya, tiratrashcha kathitAstava || --devI bhAgavata 3.7.26

The ordinary, current, and, so far, almost exclusively accepted meaning, as goodness-passion-inertia, respectively, of sattva-rajas-tamas, is different; as in the case of sat-chit-Ananda, being-consciousness-bliss, also gItA ch.18, deals largely with these three attributes, of mUla-prakRti: and they are also defined in sAMkhya-kArikA.

At first sight, there seems to be no connection between the meanings assigned here to the two triplets of qualities belonging to Self and Not-Self, and the meaning assigned in current SaMskRta works.

When the ordinary vedAntin wishes to describe the opposites of sat-cbit-Ananda, which he vaguely ascribes to Brahma (without making any definite distinction between Brahma and pratyag-Atma), he speaks of anRta-jaDa-duHkha, untrue-unconscious-pain, as characterising what he, again vaguely, calls samsAra--the World-Process, or pra-pancha, the 'quintuplicate' or the 'tangled'. This is, for instance, the phraseology employed in saMkShepa-shAriraka.

These current acceptations are by no means incorrect, but they are not the 'whole truth'. They are correct only if regarded as expressing one, and a comparatively less important, aspect or portion of the full significance.

A little reflection will show how they naturally arise out of, and are connected with, the interpretations given here. The following statement of the various senses, in which each of these six words is used in SaMskRtam, will help to show how thought has passed from one shade of meaning to another:

• सत्, sat, is being, existent, real, true, good, also asserted or assertable, actual;
• चित्, chit, is living, conscious, aware, cognisant;
• आनंद, Ananda, is peace, feeling of satisfaction, joy, bliss, pleasure, realisation of desire;

• सत्त्व, sattva, is being, existence, truth, goodness, harmony, living being, energy, illuminating power, vital power;
• रजस्, rajas, is that which colours, dust, stain, blood, passion, restlessness, activity;
• तमस्, tamas, is darkness, dullness, inertia, confusion, chaos, pain, faintness, sleep.

sattvam rajas, tamas, have often latterly been translated as rhythm, mobility, inertia. But these words indicate only one sub-aspect of each.

• sAttvika rajas is rhythm, i.e., harmonious or uniform repetition, and the imposition, thereby, of one-ness on a series of many movements.
• rAjasa rajas is mobility proper.
• tAmasa rajas is inertia, persistent clinging to a state of relative rest or motion.

Such are the three guNas, rajas, sattva and tarmas, or, in the order in which they are usually mentioned, sattva, rajas, and tamas--the great attributes of mUlaprakRti.

This usual order has been changed above, in order to make it correspond with the order in which the attributes of pratyag-Atma, sat-chid-Ananda, are usually spoken of; i.e., in order to bring out the reflection-and-alliance, the correspondence, between

• sat and rajas or action-less Being and alterable movement;
• chit and sattva, or cognitionless Consciousness and cognisable quality; and finally
• Ananda and tamas, or desire-less Bliss and desirable substantiality.

Three All-Pervading Inseparables

With regard to these it has been said that "there is no individual or thing, either on earth here or in heaven amongst the gods, which is free from (i.e. devoid of) any one of these three qualities" (gitA, 17.40).

Their inseparability from each other and from Not-Self, and therefore from Self, follows naturally from all that has gone before. devI bhAgavata (3.6,7,8,9) states clearly and shows how, while one quality may, nay must, predominate in a certain individual, the others are never, and can never be, entirely absent, even in the case of the high gods, BrahmA, ViShNu, and Shiva; though they are ordinarily regarded as wholly rAjasa, sattvika, and, tAmasa, respectively.

The manifestations and results, but not the causes, of these guNas , are spoken of largely in the current SaMskRta works. Nor are any clear and detailed statements as to the correspondences between these triplets of attributes, sat-chid-Ananda, rajas-sattva-tamas, kriyA-jnAna-ichChA, and karma-guNa-dravya, available in the extant books. Of course, it is enough, in a certain sense, to group the contents of the World- Process under the categories of sattva, rajas, and tamas, because, at present, the mUla-prakRti or material aspect is the most prominent in human life; but full understanding of their significance necessarily requires knowledge of the other triplets.

Sciene Serves Life, Not Life, Science

This Not-Self, the second of the three ultimates of the World-Process, is not capable of receiving worship, or of being made the basis of religious practice, except in the way of study, as the object.

But even so, because it is one of the ultimates, it will necessarily lead, in the end, to a recognition of the other two, and so to Peace. To single-minded, disinterested, and unselfish scientists and students of the world of material objects, may be applied the words of KRShNa: "They also, ever desirous of the good of all creatures, come ultimately to Me, the Self." (gItA, 17.4).

Witness the instinctive, recognition of Self, in these statements by a man of science: "Science serves life, not life science"; "The world is an idea, or a sum of ideas"; "The actual problem ... consists not in explaining psychical by physical phenemena, but rather in reducing to its psychical elements physical, like all other psychical, phenomena." (Max Verworn, General Physiology, translated into English by F.S.Lee (1899), pp.2,37,38.)

It is not surprising that such recognition should often be imperfect and often distorted, as witness this other statement of the same man of science : "... this monistic conception ... alone holds strictly to experience ... and necessarily sets aside the ancient doctrine ... of the wandering of the soul." (Ibid., p.39.)

It is much to have advanced to a recognition of Self; correction of inaccurate and hasty deductions, is possible only on due study of the nature of that Self. That study will show how there may be, or rather must be, one Self and monism or rather non-dualism, and yet also many selves and "wanderings of souls", at the same time.

Monism includes Pluralism

Study of physical science, pursued sufficiently far, no doubt leads to monism also; to the realisation that the World-Process is something continuous, unbroken: that the individual is not independent, but part of one continuous whole.

But the advaita thus reached is generally an external or objective advaita, so to say, one in terms of the third person. Further reflection converts it into internal and subjective; transforms it into terms of the first person.

To reach advaita is to attain mokSha; and vichAra, viveka, thinking, is the way: pondering, reflecting, discriminating, meditating, dwelling on any one of the main aspects or factors of the universe, 'consciousness' (see pp.26-29, supra), or 'will', 'cause', 'matter', or 'force', etc.

In fact, the seeker may start anywhere, but if he only goes on to the end, he will surely arrive at the same goal. But, it should be noted and remembered, the intellectual attitude of abhyAsa, perseverant search, must be accompanied by the ethical attitude of vairAgya, passionate rejection of the selfishness of the personal or individual self; otherwise the Universal Self will remain hidden; for the plain reason that the eye, which is turned to the finite by selfish desire, cannot see that which is in the opposite direction, the Infinite, to which the eye can be turned only by un-selfish desire; but when it is so turned, it simply cannot help seeing It.

 

[tks]

Sri Saidevo - Thank you for introducing this book to the members here. I just downloaded and started reading the chapters. I also had some time to begin reading your postings in this thread. My initial reaction in reading the book is that it is a easy read if you had a prior background, otherwise one may find it very difficult.

Also I do not like translation of Atma as soul, swarga as 'heaven', confusion of Immortality with 'heaven' that is sometimes implied, etc. More on these topics later

Regards

 

[tks]

April 11, 2011 posting:

And as this holds true for every one, at every point, does it not follow that
all these 'every ones' are only One, that all these 'our' consciousnesses
are only one Universal Consciousness, which makes all this appearance of
mutual intelligence and converse possible?

Sri Saidevo -

This book is written a while ago. Some of these reasonings are not very compelling in my view though some writers and speakers use them. This idea of universal conciousness cannot be proved by any reasonings though the arguements (I have seen slighly better reasonings) can show that it is perhaps reasonable.

You seem to have done a nice job of adding your commentaries in my humble opinion!

The book uses phrases and words that have specific meaning in other religions - e.g., Salvation etc. While there are references to Upanishads and other sources, the citations and jargons detract one from getting the main point in each chapter in my view. A citation or description from sources could be used if they add to providing further clarity. References to Yoga Vasishtam is great but some of those stories can paint a wrong picture in one's head.

Just sharing my reaction, not a critique of this book written perhaps by an accomplished person.

Book chapters are not difficult to read but I have not found a reason (read only 4 chapters so far) why I would recommend this to anyone yet..

Regards

 

[saidevo]

namaste tks.

IMO, the book has to be read in contemplation, which is why I have in my serialization of it, shown the quotes in context, rather than as footnotes. I wondered at the 'science' in the title when I started reading the book first time, but now I understand how appropriate it is. Since you have only read the initial chapters, I shall wait for you to finish the book either from the pdf download or through this serialization, before I post my impressions as to why I consider it a great work.

 

[saidevo]

Note: Metaphysic Illuminates

Such statements as those of Max Verworn, quoted above, have become increasingly common in the half-century that has elapsed since the appearance of that scientist's book. Modern physicists have begun to say, 'Matter is only Force', 'Atoms are vortices of Nothing'; which is, perhaps, going to the other extreme. (See leading scientists' opinions collected in The Essential Unity of All Religions, pp.19-26).

The Secret Doctrine

mUla-prakRti (Matter, mAtrA) and daivi-prakRti (Force, shakti, from div, to shine, to play) are not separable; but they are distinguishable. The Secret Doctrine says, "Fohat digs holes in Space"; which holes are atoms. The idea seems to be that if you regard Space as a Plenum, then atoms are to be understood or imagined as holes in it (like air-bubbles in a solid lump of glass), by contrast of 'finite individual' against 'In-finite Universal". Per contra, if you look upon Space as a Vacuum, then atoms have to be thought of as 'solid particles', for the same contrast.

A brief look into the 500-pages of minute-print Indices (Secret Doctrine, Vol.VI of the Adyar edition), at references to 'Atom', 'Fohat', 'Force', 'Space', 'Plenum', 'Vacuum', will convince the reader of the overwhelming character of the very numerous and very different statements regarding each. After a second and a third systematic reading of the whole work to say nothing of the much more frequent consultation of particular pages the mind remains puzzled and bewildered. At the same time, it also remains convinced that the book is not to be lightly put aside, in hopeless revolt against its 'mysteriousness', but must be pondered over, again and again. Almost every statement, however dis-jointed-seeming, has some important significance; and each successive pondering brings some new and interesting aspect into view.

Anyway, even one reading of the great work, and of The Mahatma Letters, leaves the reader in possession of a positive general idea, though cloudy and tantalising, of the law of cyclic and spiral involution-evolution, as governing the Whole World-Process, and the subsidiary law of septenates, as governing at least the solar sytem to which our earth and our race belong. It also gives a very encouraging glimpse into, and throws light on, the meaning of Puranic allegories.

If a few metaphysical principles are drawn from Vedanta, and are firmly held and carefully and diligently applied, they may prove a very helpful clue in the labyrinthine jungle of facts and 'fancies' (allegories), set out in the books. Their complexity only copies the actual World-Process; and the books themselves insist, over and over again, on the necessity of studying brahma-vidyA, Atma-vidyA, vedAnta, in order to simplify the complexity, and to understand the Nature, of the World-Process, and also to practise successfully, the wholesome individual and social life of 'Dharma, which brings happiness here and hereafter'. Study of metaphysic is strongly advised in The Mahatma Letters, pp.250,262.

Why and How of Fohat

The reader is invited to peruse carefully, pp.79-83 of the Proem (in Vol.I, of The Secret Doctrine, Adyar edition), at this stage, and consider whether the preceding chapters of the present work help to make any clearer, the connotations of, and the relations between,

• (1) "para-brahman, the One Reality, the Absolute, ... Absolute Consciousness, ... Absolute Negation, ...
• (2) Spirit (or Consciousness) and Matter, Subject and Object. ...

• (3) Pre-cosmic Ideation ... fons et origo
‣ of (3-a) Force and of all Individual Consciousness; ...
‣ (3-b) Pre-cosmic Root-substance (mUla-prakRti), ... that aspect of the Absolute which underlies all the objective planes of Nature;" (p. 80).

‣ On p. 81, it is said: "Just as pre-Cosmic Ideation is the root of all individual Consciousness, so pre-Cosmic substance is the substratum of Matter in the various grades of its differentiation...

‣ Apart from Cosmic substance, Cosmic Ideation could not manifest as individual Consciousness, since it is only through a vehicle that consciousness wells up as 'I am I', a physical basis being necessary to focus a Ray of the Universal Mind...

‣ The Manifested Universe, therefore, is pervaded by Duality, which is, as it were, the very essence of its Ex-istence as 'Manifestation'. But just as the opposite poles of Subject and Object, Spirit and Matter, are but aspects of the One Unity in which they are synthesised, so, in the Manifested Universe, there is that which links Spirit to Matter, Subject to Object.

• This something is called by Occultists, (4) Fohat. It is the 'bridge' by which the (4-a) Ideas existing in the (5) Divine Thought are impressed on Cosmic substance as the 'Laws of Nature'. Fohat is thus the (6) Dynamic Energy of Cosmic Ideation, or, regarded from the other side, it is the (7) intelligent medium, the guiding power of all manifestation, the 'Thought Divine'...

• Fohat, in its various manifestations, is the mysterious link between Mind and Matter, the (8) animating principle "[prANa in one aspect, jIva in another] "electrifying every atom into life."

(The figures 1 to 8, in brackets, have been put in by the present writer, in the above excerpt.)

• 'Absolute Negation', 'Absolute Consciousness', 'I am I', the Why and the How of the origin of Duality in or from the 'One Unity'; the metaphysical crux of such a Relation between Subject and Object, Spirit and Matter, as will not falsify the Absoluteness of the Absolute Negation;--all these may perhaps be better understood if 'Absolute Negation' and 'I am I' are interpreted in the light of 'I-am-(Not Not)-I'.

• So, too, Fohat, as 'that which links Spirit to Matter' as 'dynamic energy of Cosmic Ideation,' as 'intelligent Medium, the Thought Divine' and as 'the animating principle'--all this may, perhaps, be better understood, if 'I-(am)-Not-Not-I' is seen as the Supreme Logion (or Logos), mahA-vAkya, Great Word, the whole of Cosmic Ideation, Thought Divine, and the One Supreme Law of Nature; if it is seen as the Necessity of the whirling wheeling round and round each other, in mutual succession, of 'Am' and 'Am-Not', as 'Dynamic Energy'; and if the Desire-Will aspect of 'Am' and 'Am-Not' is seen as 'animating principle', and the subordinate Laws of Nature as 'subsidiary necessities', issuing like corollaries from the One Primal Necessity hidden in the Supreme Logion, and expressed by minor mahA-vAkyas. The succeeding chapters may perhaps help to make the nature of Force--shakti a little clearer.

The all-important facts or concepts of Space, Time, and Motion, also naturally figure prominently, and are referred to frequently, in H.P.B.'s great Work (as the Index indicates amply). But the metaphysical Why and How of them does not appear to have been expounded in it. An attempt is made in this work, in the preceding, and further endeavour will be made in the succeeding, chapters, to supply this, as well as a few other thoughts or things, out of SaMskRta scriptures.

The Mahatma Letters and The Secret Doctrine

In connection with this topic, of de-finite a-tom (indivis-ible, from Gr. a, not, and tonein, to cut, to divide) and In-finite space, the following quotation from The Mahatma Letters, pp.77-78, may be helpful to bear in mind:

"The whole individuality is centred in the middle, or 3rd, 4th, and 5th principles. During earthly life it is all in the 4th (kAmarUpa, sometimes called kAma-manas), the centre of energy, volition, will."

Veda upaniShads say, kAma-maya eva ayam puruShaH '(in-divid-ualised) Man is Desire only', i.e., Desire is the in-divid-ualising, focussing, finitising, defining, de-limiting, principle.

Now, that which is Desire-Force in the mental, ideal, 'spiritual', or 'subjective' aspect, that same manifests as Fohat-Force in the physical, real, 'material', or objective aspect, and makes the in-divid-uai in-divis-ible a-tom.

Fohat 'focusses' the Universal, concentrates it, brings It to a point, makes it an in-divid-ual, (as a magnifying glass does the diffused sunshine). It does this by linking, binding (bandha), the whole and Universal I with a part-icle, a part-icular 'this', an 'a-tom', an up-Adhi, 'l-am-this'.

The Secret Doctrine defines and describes Fohat and its doings in dozens of ways (vide Index); but this metaphysical idea will probably help to synthesise them all. The chapters which follow, attempt to expound this idea further. The Science of the Emotions deals in extenso with the view that 'the individual man is essentially Desire', and Cognition and Volition-Action are adjuncts; and that the fading away of Desire is, per contra, the re-universalising of the individual, the resolving and dissolving of the whirlpool, its mokSha, releasing, back into the Ocean.

******************************

 

[Brahin]

The Absolute and the Relative - Essays in Life and Eternity - Chapter 1

keep on reading the Metaphysical Foundations chapters..there are 6

 

[tks]

namaste tks.

IMO, the book has to be read in contemplation, which is why I have in my serialization of it, shown the quotes in context, rather than as footnotes. I wondered at the 'science' in the title when I started reading the book first time, but now I understand how appropriate it is. Since you have only read the initial chapters, I shall wait for you to finish the book either from the pdf download or through this serialization, before I post my impressions as to why I consider it a great work.

Sri Saidevo-ji -

Thanks for offer to wait. I am away traveling and hence have not been able to spend much time here for the last few days. But I do understand your point about reading in contemplation which is more useful and more time consuming. I will get back to reading next week when I am back home

Regards

 

[saidevo]

******************************
adhyAtmavidyA in Synthesis: 11. 'dvam-dvam'--The Relative: Negation as Shakti-Energy
******************************
Negation as shakti-energy: The Relation and the Cause of Interplay between the Self and the Not-Self

THE third factor in the sva-bhAva--own-being, of the Absolute is ni-Shedha, or prati-Shedha--Negation, denial, 'Not' or rather the connecting of 'Not' with 'Not-I' by 'I'.'

sva-bhAva; ni-Shedha, prati-Shedha. 'Own-being' may be regarded as a variant of 'thing-in-itself'; it is 'self-being', 'being-in-its-self', the peculiarity, personality, individuality of the thing; 'temperament' in the mediaeval medical phrase; 'constitutional idiosyncracy' in the modern scientific medical phrase; prakRti, nature, in both SaMskRta Darshana, i.e., philosophy, and vaidyaka--medicine.

mUla-prakRti or Matter and daivi-prakRti or Force, together, make up the whole sva-bhAva of puruSha or pratyag-Atma. शक्ति-शक्तिमतोः अभेदः--shakti shaktimatoH abhedaH--'Force and Possessor of Force are not-different, not-separate though distinguishable.'

From the standpoint of the Absolute, this third factor is not a third, any more than the second is a second; for the third is a negation of the second which is Nothing, No-limited-or-particular-thing, Not-Being; and, where this is so, it also follows that the first is not a first, for there is nothing left to recognise it by as a first; the resultant being a Purity of Peace as regards which nothing can be said and no exception taken.

Anagogic Permutations

The full significance of this Negation, which is the nexus between Self and Not-Self, will appear when we consider the different interpretations, which turn upon it, of the logion, each correct, and each exemplified and illustrated in the universe around us.

Thus, the logion aham-etat-na may mean:

• (a) M U A. Not Not-Self (,but only) Self (is).
• (b) U A M. Not-self (is, and) Self (is) Not.
• (c) M A U. (Only vacuity, nothingness is, and) Not Self (or) Not-Self.
• (d) A M U. Self (is) Not Not-Self; or, Self (is) Not (,to the) Not-Self.
• (e) U M A. Not-Self (is) Not Self; or Not-Self (is) Not (,to) Self.
• (f) A U M. Self (is) Not-Self (and also) Not (it).
• (g) A--U--M. Self--Not-Self--Not, the Absolute wherein all possible permutations are.

These permutations are based on statements made in the praNava vAda, an unpublished SaMskRta MS., referred to in Note I at the end of Ch.7 (p.121, supra).

As explained in detail in that work, Veda in the full sense of the word, is Cosmic Ideation, i.e., everything, (see footnote, p.40 supra), and the four collections of hymns, currently known as the Vedas, in the plural, may be regarded as comparatively small but highly important text-books of superphysical art and metaphysical science.

What is Absolute Truth?

The question may be legitimately asked: If all these permutations and combinations of the factors of the logion are, as indeed they obviously ought to be, included in Cosmic Ideation, and therefore true in their own times, places, and circumstances, is there any final absolute truth, independently of time, place, and circumstance; and is there any infallible test of truth? Who is to judge between the rival claimants of truth? What will decide? Is it spiritual experience? But spiritual experiences differ also; who is to judge between them?

These difficulties may be solved thus. Absolute Truth can be only that which totals up, reconciles, and synthesises in itself, all 'other' truths, showing that they are all relative or partial or half-truths.

If a person says: "No; errors and heresies are the irreconcilable opposites of the truth," then he has to explain how they, (like sin, evil, pain, etc.,) came to be.

If he says, "By the act of God," then 'God' is his absolute truth wherein the reconciliation is found. What 'God' means, and how he brings home the 'absolute truth' of 'God' creating error, etc., will remain for him to explain, or rather for the questioner and seeker to find out;

for, the person who says errors are irreconcilable and synthesis impossible, has no use for absolute truth, i.e., the Absolute; he is not seeking it and does not want it--yet. He is perfectly content with what he has got, and it would be a mistake to try to give to him something else which he does not want; as food to one not hungry.

If there be any special reasons making it right to do so, then the need should first be aroused in him. But the craving for Absolute Truth is not easily aroused from without, by 'another'. It comes from within, through the cyclic processes of life of the individual self.

Therefore, among the special and peculiar qualifications mentioned for the student of Vedanta, the seeker after Brahma, is the ethical attitude of vairAgya--revulsion from the worldly life and dispassionate compassion for all sufferers, and kShama, dama, uparati, titikShA, shraddhA, samAdhAna, inner subsidence of desire and consequent serenity, self-control over senses, wish for retirement and repose, resigned endurance of whatever befalls, firm faith in one-Self and in the guide and teacher one has chosen with due care, and collected single-mindedness; bRhad-AraNyaka upaniShad, 4.4.23; nRsimha uttara tApini upaniShad 6; Shankara, shArIraka bhAshya, 1.1.1.

न अनुभूय, न जानाति, जंतुर्विषयतीक्ष्णताम् ।
निर्विद्येत स्वयं तस्मान्; न परैर्भिन्नधि: पुनः ॥

na anubhUya, na jAnAti, jaMturviShayatIkShNatAm |
nirvidyeta svayaM tasmAn; na parairbhinnadhi: punaH ||--bhAgavata, 6.4.41.

DakSha, reprimanding NArada, (who has led DakSha's young sons astray, preaching vairAgya to them), says: "Without experience of the sharpness, the intensity, of the objects of sense, there can be no surfeit and no real, lasting, revulsion therefrom; the jIva should, therefore, turn from the world, suo motu; not mis-led prematurely by others."

But as soon as the craving is aroused, the possibility of fulfilling it is aroused also. So soon as, and no sooner than, a question forms in the mind, the answer begins to form also.

In fact the question is the first part of the answer. As soon as a person says, "I want the Absolute Truth." he means, "I want something which will reconcile, synthesise, explain, and not merely condemn and abuse, all truths other or less than this ideal Absolute Truth"; and, as soon as he means that, he is on the track of it, he has got hold of a vital feature of it.

"It takes two to tell the truth, one to tell it and one to hear it" ; "truth is truth to him who believes it": "the one test of truth is the belief of the believer"; if you convince a person that what he has believed so far is not true, then you have created a new belief in him; therefore he, the I, the Self, the One We, is the final, universal, absolute test of Truth.

'Self-evidence' is the absolute test and the Absolute Truth. He who asks, "Who is to judge?" understands the answer, "The judge must be common, impartial, equally benevolent to him, you, me, all the parties, and, here, such is the Self"; and he who asks "What is to prove", will understand the answer, "Self-evidence", the evidence of the Self, by, to, and in the Self.

The western school of thinkers who said 'conceivability' was the test, really meant this. 'Spiritual experience' is nothing distant and mysterious. All a-pa-roksha, direct 'experience', which comes home, whether cognitive, emotional, or actional, is such; and whether of physical or of superphysical and subtle things. It attains its highest degree, its 're-alisation', its 're-ality', its 'act-uality', when all these aspects of the consciousness coalesce, when the individual's cognition is so clear and certain that he feels or desires and also acts accordingly. The faith that maketh martyrs witnesseth itself. See pp.22-23,96, supra.

The Self-Evident

Such permutations and combinations of Self and Not-Self and Negation give rise to the actual varieties of facts in the universe and to the corresponding beliefs of man; now to the prevalence of Spirit, now to the triumph of Matter, again to the reign of pra1aya; to dreaming, waking, and sleeping; to subjective monism or idealism, objective monism or materialism, shUnya-vAda or nihilism, pantheism, solipsism, dualism, absolutism, etc. (corresponding broadly, not strictly, to a, b, c, etc., above, respectively) and all other possible forms of beliefs.

इति नाना प्रसंख्यानं तत्त्वानां ऋषिभिः कृतम् ।
सर्वं न्याय्यं युक्तिमत्त्वात्; विदुषां किमशोभनम् ॥

iti nAnA prasaMkhyAnaM tattvAnAM RuShibhiH kRutam |
sarvaM nyAyyaM yuktimattvAt; viduShAM kimashobhanam ||--bhAgavata, 11.22.2

"The seers have thus explained the fundamental constituents and features of the universe in various ways. Each way is just, because of its own special reasons. The wise see no conflict and no lack of beauty in any."

Each preceding view leaves behind an unreduced surd, and consequent discontent, which grows slowly. When the last view is reached, no surd remains; all views are reconciled; each is seen to have its own beauty and duty.

From one standpoint, pantheism may appear as a combination of I and Not-I only, rather than as a permutation of all three factors of the Logion. But (f) above may be interpreted as Spinoza's pantheism, viz., that A and U, Thought and Extension, (Mind and Matter), both, are two aspects of that which is Not-describable otherwise; or as (the poet Alexander) Pope's pantheism, viz., "The universe is one stupendous whole, whose Body Nature is and God the soul."

Turmoil within Peace

All these permutations mean only the accentuating, in different degrees, of the factors of the Logion severally. If we emphasise them all equally, then we find the Peace of the Absolute left untouched; because the net result, of the three being taken in combination, is always a neutralising, a balancing, of opposition, which may indifferently be called fullness or emptiness, peace or blankness, "the voice, the music, the resonance of the silence";

because the three, A, U, and M, are verily simultaneous, are in inseparable combination, are not amenable to arrangements and re-arrangements, to permutations and combinations; and these last merely appear, but appear inevitably, only when the whole is looked at from the standpoint of a part--an A, a U, or an M, which is necessarily bound to an order, a succession, an arrangement.

And yet also the whole multitude and Turmoil of the World-Process is in that Peace; for 'No-thing', Not-Self, is 'all things destroying each other', and Negation is 'abolition of all these particular things'; and 'I' is that for the sake of which, and in, and by the consciousness of which, all this abolition takes place.

This is the true significance of the sAMkhya doctrine that prakRti--Not-Self, displays herself and hides herself incessantly, only in order to provide an endless foil for the Self-realisation, the amusement, of puruSha--Self. In such interplay, both find everlasting and inevitable fullness of manifestation, fullness of realisation, and unfettered recreation.

Metaphysical Catalysis

Compare H.Ellis, Psychology of Sex, Vol.Ill, p.95 ("Love and Pain"):

"... The male is active and the female passive and imaginatively attentive to the states of the excited male ... The female develops a superadded activity, the male becoming relatively passive and imaginatively attentive to the psychical and bodily states of the female. ...";

and the well-known doctrines, of sAMkhya, viz., that puruSha is the actionless Spectator of the movements, the dance, of prakRti;

and of Vedanta, viz., that the juxtaposition or coexistence of puruSha and prakRti, (the metaphysical archetypes of sex), superimposes, causes adhyAsa of, the characteristics of each upon the other, by vi-varta, inversion.

The mere presence and proximity of a person, of one sex is enough to produce some excitement (not necessarily lustful at all) in a person of the other sex. The sAMkhya description of prakRti exhibiting Herself to the watching puruSha, and shrinking away ashamed, as soon as the latter loses interest and turns away His eyes--this is, literally, an expansion, to the Universal and Infinite scale, of the facts of daily sex-life; and the latter are, conversely and obversely, the contraction to the finite scale, of the Infinite Fact, of the never-ceasing Drama of the Interplay of the Eternal Masculine and the pseudo-Eternal Feminine.

पुरुषस्य दर्शनार्थं, कैवल्यार्थं, तथा, प्रधानस्य ।
पुंगु अन्धवद्, उभयोर् अपि संयोगः, तत्कृतः सर्गः ॥
प्रकृतेः सुकुमारतरं न किंचिद् अस्ति, इति मे मतिर्भवति ।
या द्यष्टा अस्मीति पुनर्न दर्शनं उपैति पुरुषस्य ॥

puruShasya darshanArthaM, kaivalyArthaM, tathA, pradhAnasya |
puMgu andhavad, ubhayor api saMyogaH, tatkRutaH sargaH ||
prakRuteH sukumArataraM na kiMchid asti, iti me matirbhavati |
yA dyaShTA asmIti punarna darshanaM upaiti puruShasya ||
--sAMkhya kArikA 21 and 16.

"In order that puruSha may see prakRti and then retire into Soli-tude, and that prakRti may show Herself (and then shrink away), the two come together; as may the lame man who cannot walk but can see, and the blind man who can walk but cannot see, in order to help each other. Very modest, shy, sensitive, is prakRti; for having shown herself, and been seen, if the spectator turns away, she vanishes."

The chemical phenomenon of catalysis seems to correspond to the psychological phenomenon of "imaginative attention" and its effects upon that which is attended to. The watering of the mouth in the presence of a tasteful edible; the expanding of the eyes or the nostrils, in that of a beautiful form or color or fragrant perfume all these are variants of the same fact. In all cases, of course, the perceiver must be 'interested' and 'pursuant'; not 'tired' and 'renunciant'.

 

[saidevo]

The Ever Implicit 'am' in Both Parts of the Logion

The why of the movement of this Interplay, of to and fro, identification and separation, action and reaction, has been already dealt with, in one aspect, in the previous chapter. It will have appeared from what was said there, that the Negation necessarily appears, and can only appear, in the limited as, first, an affirmation, and then, a negation.

We may now consider a little more fully the nature of the affirmation and the negation. The statement, repeated from time to time, that negation hides affirmation within it, and as preceding it in time, should be clearly grasped.

In the logion, Ego Non-ego Non (est), the bracketed est, (or sum), is the hidden affirmation. A little reflection shows that it should be so, and must be so, quite unobjectionably; that thought can detect no fault in the fact. Take away the est, not only from the sentence but really from consciousness, and the remaining three words lose all coherent meaning.

To deny a thing, it is necessary first to describe it, to allege it as at least a supposition, a hypothesis; and to describe it, is to postulate for it at least a false, an assumed, existence. In order that Non-Ego may be denied, it must first be alleged as at least a supposition. For this reason, and for the reason that affirmation and negation cannot be contemporaneous in a single, particular, limited, thing, it comes about, as we have seen, that the logion, for the purposes of the limited, in order that the limited may ex-ist and appear and be a fact at all, necessarily falls into two parts, (a) Ego Non-Ego, and (b) Non-Ego Non.

The first contains implicitly, hidden in its stated words, the word est or sum, for otherwise it has no meaning; and the second part also similarly contains implicitly within it the same word est or sum, which alone gives it any significance.

For the reasons already partially explained in chapters 7 and 9, the affirmation and the negation respectively take on the form of an identification of Self with Not-Self, and of a separation from it.

The mere unconcerned assertion, in the third person, of the being or the non-being of Non-Ego, has no interest for Self; it has no motive for making such an apathetic assertion. Such indifferent statement about another would have no reason to justify it, to make it necessary, to explain why it came to be made at all.

It cannot be said that Not-Self is a fact, and so has an existence independent of the motives and reasons and interests of Self; because it has been settled at the outset that Not-Self cannot be, must not be, is not, independent of Self, but very dependent thereon for all such existence as it has.

Therefore it follows necessarily that the assertion and denial of that Not-Self by Self should be connected with a purpose in Self, should immediately subserve some interest in that Self. The only purpose and interest that there can be, in that which is Ever-Perfect, Full, Desireless, and therefore Purposeless, is Self-recognition, Self-definition, Self-realisation, Self-maintenance, Self-preservation, Self-assertion.

The eternal Self requires nothing in reality from outside of it-Self; it is only ever engaged in the one pastime of asking: "What am I? what am I? am I this? am I this?" and assuring itself: "No, I am not this, I am not this, but only My-Self."

This pastime, it must be remembered, which, from the standpoint of the 'this' is repeated again and again, is from the standpoint of the 'I' but one single, eternal, and changeless act of consciousness in which there is no movement.

Thus, therefore, the affirmation necessarily takes on the form of an identification of 'I' with 'Not-I', and the negation, that of the dis-identification, the separation, of 'I' from 'Not-I'. The logion is not merely a neutral statement of the non-entity of 'Not-I'.

लोकवत् तु लीलाकैवल्यम् ।
lokavat tu lIlAkaivalyam |
--brahma-sUtra 2.1.32

lIlA is pastime. A western writer has said well that "The history of man is one long search for God". Vedanta and sAMkhya-yoga instruct us how "The history of the whole universe is one eternal search-and-finding by Self of It-Self". See fn. 2 on p.84, supra.

'I (am)' Begins and Ends the Day

The affirmation, then, Ego est Non-Ego, not only imposes on 'Not-I' the Being which belongs inherently to Self, but also, for the time, makes it identical with the Self, i.e., a self; and at this stage, that is to say, in the separation of the two parts of the logion, because 'Not-I' is always a particular, a limited something, it takes on its most significant character and name, viz., 'this', 'idam', or 'etat', as it is called in SaMskRta books.

Side by side, also, with this change of name of Not-Self, (which does not mean any change of nature, but only indicates the special and most important aspect and manifestation of the nature of Not-Self), the bracketed est becomes sum, and the first part of the logion becomes: 'I (am) this'.

In continued consequence of that same reason, the second part of the logion becomes: 'This not (am I)', having the same meaning as, 'I am not this' with a special significance, viz., that in the actual World-Process, in every cycle--whether it be the daily waking and falling to sleep of the individual human being, or the sarga and pra1aya--creation and dissolution, of world-systems--the I-consciousness begins as well as ends the day, the period of activity and manifestation.

The new-born baby's first shut-eyed feeling in the morning is the vague feeling of a self, in which of course a not-self is also present, though a little more vaguely; and his last shut-eyed feeling in the evening is the same vague feeling of a self returning, from all the outward and gradually dimming not-self, into its own inwardness and sleep.

The order of the words in SaMskRta, aham-etat-na (asmi), expresses this fact; and it expresses something additional also, for asmi, '(I) am', indicates that the individual 'I', at the end of the day's work, is, as it were, fuller, has more deliberate and definite self-consciousness, than it had at the beginning thereof.

The bhrama of the 'Swan'

The 'this', it now appears, is, in the first place, the upAdhi, the body, the sheath, or the organism, which the individualised spirit occupies, owns, identifies itself with, and, again, rejects and casts away; and, in the second place, it is all the world of 'objects' with which the Spirit may identify itself, which it may possess and own as part of itself, as belonging to itself, and again renounce, in possibility.

Thus, through the dual nature of Negation, dual by reflection of the being of Self and the non-being of Not-Self, is kept incessantly moving, that revolving wheel of samsAra of which it has been declared: "That wherein all find living, that wherein all find rest, that which is boundless and shoreless in that tire-less wheel of Brahma, turneth round and round the ham-sa, the swan, because, and so long as, it believeth itself to be separate from the mover of the wheel; but when it recogniseth its own oneness with that Self which ever turneth the wheel, it forthwith cometh to rest, and attaineth the Peace of Immortality."

सर्वाजीवे सर्वसंस्थे बृहन्ते तस्मिन् हंसो भ्राम्यते ब्रह्मचक्रे ।
पृथग् आत्मानं प्रेरितारं च मत्वा; जुष्टस्ततस्तेन अमृतत्वम् एति ॥

sarvAjIve sarvasaMsthe bRuhante tasmin haMso bhrAmyate brahmachakre |
pRuthag AtmAnaM preritAraM cha matvA; juShTastatastena amRutatvam eti ||
--shvetAshvatara upaniShad 1.6.

GItA also speaks of the chakra of the World-Process (ii.16). The 'cyclical' movement of the World-Process, in space and in time, is a patent fact; its reason is to be found in the alternating, rhythmic, succession of the two parts of the logion. Chakra, (Greek) kuklos, cycle, circle, are etymologically allied.

The same idea, as expressed by bhrama or bhrAnti appearing in Brahma, 'wandering and straying round and round in space', has been referred to on p.159, supra.

To run round and round in circles, as the orbs of space are doing, like puppies chasing their own tails, is to be aimless, mistaken, illusion-ed. The word bhrama covers all these meanings, all these analogies. Say that "chasing one's own tail" is "chasing one's own Self", and the aimless becomes the aimful; the illusion-ed, becomes the illumin-ed.

Trying to Achieve Infinity by Endless Circling

To put it in another way: This verse of the upaniShad pictures the vi-varta view. Believing it-self to be an infinitesimal speck, the jIva rushes round and round, trying to achieve Infinity by encompassing all Space.

It does so, because, though outwardly believing itself to be limited, finite, inwardly it knows it-self to be Infinite; and the endless circling and cycling is due to the necessity of making the Outer belief One with the Inner; and thus abolishing the restless and intolerable pain of inconsistency and conflict.

So soon as the jIva dis-covers that it is It-Self this Infinite Space, that It has that Space within It-Self, instead of It-Self being within It, so soon is the vi-varta, 'reversal' of outlook, change of attitude, completed.

It is the same with Time and Motion. The 'solid' substantial speck or atom, which the jIva formerly identified itself with, in 'empty' Space, now begins to be seen as a 'vacuum'-bubble ('koilon'), a 'vortex of nothing', (mere 'imagination'), in 'a Plenum of Consciousness. There is a reversal, vi-varta, in all aspects and respects.

The world is seen in a 'new' light. Every-thing becomes 'new'; प्रकर्षेण सर्वं नवी करोति इति प्रणवः--prakarSheNa sarvaM navI karoti iti praNavaH;--'because it makes everything seem new, therefore is it called pra-Nava'.

'The solid-seeming world doth vanish like a cloud, nor leaves a wrack behind'; becomes a dream, when 'man, most ignorant of what he's most assured, his glassy essence', casts off that i-gnor-ance, a-vidyA, recovers vidyA, wisdom, assurance of his glassy essence, his Self, the Self of all.

'so-ham', is the jIva that recognises the identity of the Universal Ego with the individual ego in the words 'sah aham', 'That am I'; whereas ham-sa (which, as an ordinary word, means the migrating swan, recurrently, periodically, flying to and fro between the arctic and the temperate zones, between cold and heat), is the reversal and contradiction of this recognition, and indicates the jIva (migrating recurrently between 'this world' and 'that world', and also from body to body) which does not recognise its identity with the 'I'.

Two arcs, and two only, and always, are there in the endless revolution of this wheel. On the first arc, that which is not, 'This', appears as if it is; it takes 'name and form', 'a local habitation and a name', and predominates over Self. This is the pravRtti-mArga--Path of Pursuit, whereon the individualised self feels its identity more and more with some not-self, separates itself more and more from the Universal Self, runs after the things of sense, and takes them on to itself more and more.

But when the end of this first arc of his particular cycle comes, then it inevitably undergoes viveka and vairAgya, discriminative, reflective, introspective, intense thinking and surfeit, and turns round on to the other arc, the nivRtti-mArga--Path of Renunciation; on which, realising more and more its identity with the Universal Self, it separates itself more and more from the things of sense, and gradually and continually gives away all that it has acquired of Not-Self to other jIvas, who are on the pravRtti-mArga and need them.

See pp.12,18. vi-veka is discrimination between nitya and anitya, the Permanent and the Fleeting; and vai-rAgya is the coefficient revolt against all selfish desire for fleeting things and sorrow-pervaded joys. The Permanent appears to the jIva first as the lasting, then as the ever-lasting, and only finally as the true Eternal, the opposite or vi-varta of the other two, in correspondence respectively with the three answers (chs. 2 and 7, supra).

Thus, while on the first arc, Not-Self, falsely masquerading as a self, prevails, and the true Self is hidden, on the second arc the true Self prevails, and that Not-Self, or the false self, is hidden and slowly passes out of sight.

 

[saidevo]

'Eye of Matter' and 'Eye of Spirit'

To him who sees with the 'eye of matter' only, incognisant yet of the true Self, the jIva seems to live and grow on the first arc, and to decay and die on the second, and be no more at the end of it. The reverse is the case to the 'eye of spirit'. What the truth is, of both and in both, is clear to him who knows the sva-bhAva of the Absolute, and the perfect balance between Spirit and Matter.

Inasmuch as 'this-es' are endless in number and extent of temporal and spatial limitation, cycles are also endless in number and extent, ranging from the smallest to the largest; and yet there are no smallest and largest, for there are always smaller and larger.

Again, cycles and periods of activity are always and necessarily being equally, balanced by corresponding periods of non-activity; and vice versa. Further reasons for this may appear later on, in connection with the Law of Action and Reaction, and the nature of Death.

Thus sarga, emanation, is succeeded by pralaya, dissolution, and the latter by the former, endlessly, on all possible scales; and their minute intermixture and complication is pseudo-infinite. Thus are the names justified, of nitya-sarga, continual incessant creation, and nitya-pralaya, perpetual unremitting destruction.

buddhi and manas: Hot Point of Consciousness

From this complication it results that

• there is no law belonging to any one cosmic system, small or large, which the limited jIva can divine and work out, on limited data, with the lower reason, i.e., the understanding or manas, of which law there is no breach and to which there is no exception;

• and, again, there is no breach which will not come under a higher law belonging to another and larger system; that ultimately, 'order' and 'disorder' are both equally illusions, both essentially subjective, both 'such stuff as dreams are made of'.

• The pure or higher or transcendental reason or buddhi, sees the necessity of both, the particular law and the breach of that law, from the standpoint of the all-inclusive Absolute.

Distinction between buddhi and manas

The distinction between buddhi and manas has been indicated before and will become clearer as we proceed. Briefly, Universal Mind, unconscious or sub-conscious or supra-conscious omniscience, reason which relates together all things at once and is 'pure' from all admixture of motivation and therefore limitation, obscuration, perversion, or aberration by selfish egoistic desire and, so far as possible, the manifestation of such pure reason in the individual consciousness also is buddhi.

Individual mind, dominated by egoism, its vision coloured and narrowed by a particular interest, not made transparent and world-wide by the 'pure' wish to know all, for the sake of the 'deliverance' of all such egoistic mind, manifesting in and by attention to a particular object, is manas. Indeed, such manas is the jIva itself. (Vide the quotation from yoga-vAsiShTha in the foot-note at p.32, supra, and GItA, 16.17, and 3.29).

In terms of the logion, we might put it thus. Universal I, ideating the whole of Not-I, is Universal Mind, mahat, mahan-Atma, ViShNu, etc.; from the standpoint of the individual I, this Universal Mind is the unconscious, subconscious or supra-conscious; it is buddhi or 'pure' reason or shuddha-jnAna, in the fullest sense, reason here being not the step-by-step arguing intelligence, but the all-relating awareness, all-grasping intuition.

The same Universal, when faintly individualised (the 'We' aspect predominant, the 'I' aspect very subordinate, the egoistic intensity and limitation unaroused and undefined by strong desire), and ideating the most general aspects of the things that make up Not-I, with the faintest trace of succession, is buddhi in manifestation, cognising metaphysical, mathematical, scientific generalisations.

The same I, when ideating not-I's, 'this-es', in the predominantly particular and singular aspects, itself being focussed or canalised by definite egoistic desire, is manas, the outstanding feature of which is 'attention', whereby the 'hot point' or focus in the field of consciousness changes from place to place. (See William James, Stout, Hoffding, etc.)

The ability to direct this power of 'attention' deliberately and effectively, by practice in inhibition, ni-rodha, of psychoses that are not wanted, and in contemplation, sam-yama, of, and focussing on, that which is wanted, is yoga siddhi, achievement, accomplishment (of attentional mind-power, mental force; achievement of which ability is the first practical object of applied psychology, i.e., Yoga). (Bergson's writings help to illustrate this.)

In the more definitely individualised I, which is the man as above-mentioned, compounded of 'I' and 'not-I', 'jIva' and 'atom',

• the reflection, of the Universal buddhi above-mentioned, appears as intellect, also called buddhi in SaMskRta, with the function of jnAna or cognition;

• the reflection of the 'I' appears as aham-kAra with the function of desire-emotion; and

• the reflection of manas itself as the manas again, with the function of conation and action.

The summation of these three functions is called chitta; which, however, has a function of its own, memory, which, again, is, so to say, the Universal Mind in the individual, the infinite storehouse out of which the individual, by attention, draws, in succession, what it wants, and into which it merges, when the whirling harmonogram of vAsanA--desire, the will to live as a separate individual, tRShNA, libido, which makes chitta what it is, disappears in mokSha or pralaya (for the time being). The theosophical doctrine of Atma-buddhi-manas seems to be in accord with these ideas.

"Soul-Struggles by Night": Changing Dreaming into Waking

For illustration by analogy, we may say that the person in deep sleep represents Absolute Consciousness; just before full waking, while he is taking a prospective view of the whole of the coming day's work, he represents buddhi; when awake and actually engaged in a piece of the work, manas.

At the end of this chapter will be found a collection of relevant SaMskRta quotations in a separate Note. It seems to be an important, perhaps even fundamental part of Yoga-discipline, to 'wake up' the soul and make it conscious in the region of what is now its un-conscious.

A Master has said that a disciple progresses through "soul-struggles by night". The meaning seems to be that the disciple should fix in his mind, during the day, the determinate resolve

• that he will not allow himself to become, in the night, the puppet of his dreams;

‣ i.e., of his 'unconscious lower desires, carnal passions, etc., which come out, like thieves in the night, and secure indulgence and satisfaction for themselves, by creating the images, fancies, phantasies, dramatic scenes, situations, of the dreams;

‣ and which, the disciple has prevented his mind from entertaining during his waking hours; (or, in other words, which desires of the lower mind have been kept at bay by the disciple's higher mind, during the waking hours);

• and that, by such fixed resolve, he becomes more and more able to struggle against those base fancies;
‣ he can more and more consciously prevent them from arising, even during the dreams;
‣ and his dream-life, therefore and thereby, becomes, so to say, a continuation of his day-life, part of his waking consciousness.

The same Master has said elsewhere (but my memory here is faint and doubtful) that he, the Master, sleeps without dreaming at all, the three or four hours, out of the twenty-four, that he ordinarily spends in bed. In this way, the 'individual', progressing on the Upward Path becomes more and more perfectly self-controlled on all planes of his being, more and more Master of him-Self.

• Persistent introspection, pratyak-chetanA; tracing semi-consciously, even during the dream, its occurrence to the influence of incidents which have actually taken place in the day;

• mantra-japa, continuous inner silent recitation of some 'sacred words of power';

• willing and praying to the All-pervading 'Power', for 'power' to resist evil thoughts, and bring in good ones only--all this helps the soul to struggle successfully.

Having thus very cursorily indicated some of the most important features of the Interplay of Self and Not-Self in the World-Process, as arising out of the affirmative-negative nature of the third factor of the Absolute, we may next deal with the Cause of the Interplay, from another standpoint than that taken up in Chapter X, in connection with the question why parts appear in the logion.

'Cause' and 'Condition'

It has been said that this multitudinous process of samsAra takes place through Negation, and the word 'necessary' and its derivatives have been used from time to time, all along, in accounting for step after step of the deduction.

• It is clear that Negation, with its included affirmation, is only a description of the Relation between Self and Not-Self.

• It stands between them as a nexus between two termini.

• It inheres in the two, and is nothing apart and separate from them; by itself it can do nothing; but, as being the combined Nature of the two, it explains, expounds, accounts for, and supports the infinitely complex process of samsAra.

• This combination of the Nature of the Two into the dual Negation constitutes the Necessity of the movement involved in the Logion.

A fact is a necessary fact, a necessity. Every event is its own justification. When a fact is, so to say, violently and arbitrarily disrupted, and insistently pieces itself together in a new synthesis, a new form, the disruption is said to have been followed by its necessary consequence, illustrating the law of causality, which is the Law of Identity, i.e., Identity persisting through apparent changes in succession.

This Necessity requires no support or justification; it is self-evident at every step of the deduction; it plainly inheres in, and is part of the nature of, the three factors of the triune Absolute, which have been sufficiently explained, justified, and established, before.

For, remember, this nature is not three separate natures or even two separate natures, belonging to three or two separate, or even separable, factors of the Absolute--but is only One Single and Changeless Nature, the Nature of 'I' denying that It is 'Not-I'.

Whatever may be distinguished or said of Not-Self and Negation, or of their respective natures, can be said only by the courtesy of that Supreme Nature which is the source, the essence, and the whole, indeed the very Nature, of what we call their natures.

Bearing this in mind, we may easily see that this Supreme and changeless Nature is ni-yati, the 'fixed', Avashyaka-tA, Necessity i.e., the nature of the Whole, that which must be always, that which cannot be changed and avoided.

If 'Necessity' is derived from ne, not, and cessum, to yield, to give up, and means 'that which will not yield', then it is literally the same as A-vashyaka-tA, that which is beyond vasha or control, that which cannot be checked. The word niyati (nitarAm, wholly, yam, to control) is used frequently in yoga vAsiShTha, in the sense of 'fixed' necessity. diShTa is another SaMskRta word with an allied sense, 'destiny', 'fated', 'ordained', 'doomed'; from dish, to direct, order, point out the direction (dishA, desha) in which to go.

Necessity, the Cause of Causes

This Necessity is the One Law of all Laws, because it is the nature of the changeless, timeless, Absolute; all other laws flow from it, inhere in it, are included within it. It is the Primal Power, the One Force, the all-compelling Supreme Energy, in and of the World-Process, from which all forces are derived, and into which they all return; because they are inseparate from it, are only its endless manifestations and forms.

Its unbreakable and unalterable Oneness and Completeness appears

• in the facts of the Conservation of Energy;

• and of Motion (which undergoes transformations only, and never suffers any real reduction, so that the distinction between static and kinetic is at bottom illusory, apparent only, and, in reality, one of only comparative degree);

• and the Indestructibility of Matter, which manifests in ever-new ways, ever-new qualities, but is never changed in the Total quantity; for the Absolute may not be added to nor subtracted from.

It is Absolute Free-Will, which is called in the sacred books by the name of mAyA-shakti, Impersonal Goddess of a thousand names and a thousand hymns; who alone is in reality worshipped by every worshipper, either as nirguNA vidyA or as saguNA a-vidyA; because she ensouls all the million forms that human beings worship, each according to his heart's desire. It includes in itself the characters, or rather the single character, of all the Three Ultimates, and it thereby becomes another expression for and of the Absolute, viz., Becoming.

Thus, a hymn, personifying Shakti in imagination, utterly inseparable though she is from the Absolute, and therefore impersonal, exclaims: "Thou art the consort of the most high Brahma." [त्वं असि परब्रह्मा महिषि--tvaM asi parabrahmA mahiShi;--Shankara, Ananda-lahari]

This Necessity is the cause of all causes, kAraNam kAraNAnAm, and all other so-called necessities are but reflections of it.

Some hymns that worship Shakti

चैतन्यस्य समायोगात् निमित्तत्वं च कथ्यते ।
प्रपंचपरिणामाच्च सहकारित्वमुच्यते ।
केचितां तपः इत्याहुः, तमः केचिज्, जडं परे,
ज्ञानं, मायां, प्रधानं च, प्रकृतिं, शक्तिम्, अपि अजाम् ।
विमर्शः इति तां प्राहुः शौवशास्त्रविशारदाः ।
अविद्याम् इतरे प्राहुर्वेदतत्त्वार्थचिंतका ।
एवं नानाविधानि स्युर्नामानि निगमादिषु ।

chaitanyasya samAyogAt nimittatvaM cha kathyate |
prapaMchapariNAmAccha sahakAritvamuchyate |
kechitAM tapaH ityAhuH, tamaH kechij, jadaM pare,
j~jAnaM, mAyAM, pradhAnaM cha, prakRutiM, shaktim, api ajAm |
vimarshaH iti tAM prAhuH shauvashAstravishAradAH |
avidyAm itare prAhurvedatattvArthachiMtakA |
evaM nAnAvidhAni syurnAmAni nigamAdiShu |
--devI bhAgavata 7.32.

"Shakti becomes an Efficient Cause, nimitta, by conjunction with Consciousness, chaitanya; and a necessary Condition, concomitant. saha-kAri, (or sAdhAraNa, a-prthak-siddha, upa-kAraNa) in transformations of objects. Some call Her tapas, some tamas, jaDa, a-jnAna, mAyA, prakRti, or ajA. Shaivas name Her vimarSha; Vaidikas, a-vidyA. Such are Her many names in the nigamas, traditions, of different thinkers and worshippers."

रुद्रहीनं विष्णुहीनं न वदंति जनाः किल ।
शक्तिहीनं यथा सर्वे प्रवदंति नराधनम् ॥

rudrahInaM viShNuhInaM na vadaMti janAH kila |
shaktihInaM yathA sarve pravadaMti narAdhanam || --Ibid. 3.6..

प्रणवार्थस्वरूपां तां भजामो भुवनेश्वरीं ।

praNavArthasvarUpAM tAM bhajAmo bhuvaneshvarIM | --ibid. 7.28.

"When men wish to express contempt for a (feeble, lethargic, inert, spineless) person, they do not call him Rudra-less or ViShNu-less, but Shakti-less, Power-less, Energy-less. We meditate on Her, the Sovereign Goddess of the Universe, as the very Meaning, the whole significance, of pra-Nava, AUM."

 

[saidevo]

ch.11 (cont.) 'lIlA', the Final 'why'

We may appropriately consider the meaning of 'Cause' in this connection. From the standpoint of psychology, as has been shown over and over again by various acute and accurate thinkers in many lands,

• the world is an endless succession of sense-impressions; and

• the idea of absolute necessity, which we associate with the successions that are described as cause and effect, is a mere hallucination produced by the fact that a certain succession has been invariable so far as our experience has gone.

This view is correct so far as it goes; but only so far as it goes. It does not go far enough. It does not explain satisfactorily the 'Why' of the hallucination. Indeed, some holders of the view refuse to deal with a 'Why' at all. They content themselves with a mere description, a 'How'. But others will not rest within such restrictions. They must understand how and why there come to be a 'How', and a 'Why' at all in our consciousness; how and why we talk of 'because' and 'therefore' and 'for this reason'. It is true that every so-called law of nature is only "a resume, a brief description, of a wide range of perceptions," (Pearson's Grammar of Science, p.132, 1st edn.) l but why is there any uniformity in the world at all, such as makes possible any such resume or brief description?

The explanation of all this is that each 'why', each generalisation, each law, is subsumed under a wider and wider law, till we come to that final and widest law, the Logion, which is the resume, the sva-bhAva, the nature, of the Absolute, which, sva-bhAva, because of its Changelessness, requires no further 'why'.

यद् अपरिणामि तद् अकारणाम् ।

yad apariNAmi tad akAraNAm |--nyAya maxim
'The unchanging is the uncaused.'

The series of 'why's,' with reference to actions, 'Why did you do this?' 'Because of this,' 'Why that?' 'Because of that,' etc., ceases when the reply comes, 'It was my pleasure'. Few people ask further, 'Why was it your pleasure?' There is an instinctive recognition of the fact that the pleasure, the Will of the Me, the Self, is something final.

But if any should ask that question also, the reply is but an expansion, or another form or aspect, of the same fact, viz., that all 'things' are in the I; i.e., all 'this-es', all conjunctions and all disjunctions with all possible things, i.e., all possible pleasures (i.e., desires and fulfilments of desire or will for conjunction), and also all possible corresponding reactive and necessarily implied pains (which also are 'pleasures', lIlA, being willed by the Self, sub-consciously, as fulfilments of desire or will for disjunction) are Mine.

In other words, 'It was, and is, and will be my pleasure to undergo all possible experiences, including this one, which you ask about'. In the fn. on p.50, supra, is stated the question which Vidura, sorely exercised in mind, put to RShi Maitreya. Maitreya answered him in words which may be interpreted in two ways:

सा इयं भगवतो माया यत् नयेन विरुध्यते,
ईश्वरस्य विमुक्तस्य कार्पण्यं उत बन्धनं;
यद् अर्थेन विनाऽमुष्य पुंसः आत्मविपर्ययः
प्रतीयते उपद्रष्टुः स्वशिरश्छेदनादिकः ।

sA iyaM bhagavato mAyA yat nayena virudhyate,
Ishvarasya vimuktasya kArpaNyaM uta bandhanaM;
yad arthena vinA&muShya puMsaH AtmaviparyayaH
pratIyate upadraShTuH svashirashChedanAdikaH |
--bhAgavata, III.vii.9-10.

"This is the Lord's mAyA which defies all naya, logic, reason, all why and wherefore this, viz., that Ishvara, the Sovereign Lord of the Universe, the Ever-Free, appears as a humble creature bound in bonds of all sorts; that, without any artha, meaning, purpose, without rhyme or reason, senselessly, the Supreme Man turns Him-Self insideout, upside-down, reverses Him-Self, becomes the Opposite of what He really is. The Witness of all, sees Him-Self, appears to Him-Self, as to a by-stander, as if He had cut off His own head, as jugglers do!"

Such is the plain meaning of the words; but, equally plainly, it is not a satisfying reply to Vidura's question. The real reply is in the riddle of the words, yat nayena virudhyate. They admit of another interpretation, by separating the single-seeming nayena into two, na and yena. In Skt., the gloss would run:

इयं सा माया, यत्, येन ’एतदा’ भगवान् विरुध्यते, तत् न ।

iyaM sA mAyA, yat, yena 'etadA' bhagavAn virudhyate, tat na |

"The Illusion is that This, etat, which, is the Opposite of the Lord, Self, is Not.' In this way, the lIlA, Play, is seen to be static, eternally frozen, changeless; not kinetic, moving, changeful.

This may, no doubt, appear a forced explanation. But we know well that 'mystic' writings are full of such riddling rhymes, and that the 'the kingdom of Heaven has to be taken by storm'.

No Change, No Cause, No Why: Spirit's Unbroken Identity

A cause is asked for by the human mind only when there is an effect, a change. We do not ask 'Why?' otherwise.

• We ask it because the very constitution of our being, our inmost nature of unbroken unity as the one Self, 'I am I', 'A is A', revolts against the creation of something new; against A disappearing and not-A appearing; against A becoming 'not-A', i.e., becoming B, C, etc.

• We cannot assimilate such an innovation; there is nothing in that inmost nature of ours to respond to it. Our whole being, our whole nature, insistently demands Continuity, Identity, in which is to be found Changeless Immortality, and without which our Eternity would be jeopardised; for if any thing could be annihilated, why might not I also be liable to the same catastrophe?

• We therefore inevitably break out with a 'why?' whenever we see a change. And the answer we receive is a 'because', which endeavours to resolve the effect into the cause, in the various aspects of matter, motion, force, etc., and shows that the effect is really not different from the cause, but is identical with it.

And we are satisfied, our sense of, and our craving for, Unbroken Unity is soothed. Causality is the reconciliation between the necessity, the fixed unity, of Self on the one hand, and the accidentality, flow and flux, manyness, of Not-Self, on the other.

See foot-notes, ch.2, pp.7,9,11, supra. Hoffding's treatment of the problem of causation, in Outlines of Psychology, ch.V-D, will be found useful in this connection, as explaining in modern terms, vikAra or pariNAma-vAda, which may be called the scientific conception of causation. Hoffding himself holds it, as distinguished from what he calls the popular conception of causation, corresponding to Arambha-vAda.

Three Views of Cause-Effect

The last stage of thought in this respect, which may similarly be called the metaphysical conception of causation, is vivarta-vAda, next dealt with in the text, and briefly defined in pancha-dashl 13.9, thus:

अवस्थांतर भानंः तु विवर्त्तो रज्जुस् पर्वत् ।

avasthAMtara bhAnaMH tu vivartto rajjus parvat |

"The false appearance of changes of states in the Changeless One, as of a snake in a piece of rope in the dark, is vivarta, vortex, turning round, facing round, opposition."; false appearance as distinguished from really passing from one state into another.

Or, in vedAnta-sAra, thus:

अतत्वतोऽन्य था प्रथा विवर्त्त इत्युदीरितः ।

atatvato&nya thA prathA vivartta ityudIritaH |

The corresponding definition of vikAra is:

सतत्वतोऽन्यथा प्रथा विकार इत्युदीरितः ।

satatvato&nyathA prathA vikAra ityudIritaH |

'Appearance of change, when there is no real change, is vivarta; change, when real, and in a real substance, is vikAra'.

Another way of describing the three stages is this:

(1) कार्यं (आरम्भात्) पूर्वं असत्, पश्चात् सत् ।

kAryaM (ArambhAt) pUrvaM asat, pashchAt sat |

'The effect is non-existent before its birth; it is existent, real, after birth': this is the nyAya-vaisheShika view.

(2) कार्यं (उत्पत्तेः) पूर्वमपि सत्, पश्चात् च सत्;
पस्मात् कारणाद् अभिन्नं, तस्य रूपान्तरं एव, तस्य परिनामः, विकारः ।

kAryaM (utpatteH) pUrvamapi sat, pashchAt cha sat;
pasmAt kAraNAd abhinnaM, tasya rUpAntaraM eva, tasya parinAmaH, vikAraH |

'The effect is existent before as well as after birth, because it is not really different from the cause, but only another form of it': this is the sAMkhya view.

(3) कार्यं पूर्वं अपि असत्, पश्चाद् अपि ।

kAryaM pUrvaM api asat, pashchAd api |

'The effect is non-existent, unreal, untrue, before as well as after birth, i.e., appearance': this is the vedAnta view.

The reconciliation of all these is thus:

• Arambha-vAda (nyAya-vaisheShika) may be said to be true with reference to the new form, and to the kartA, the doer, actor, maker, the efficient cause, whose shakti, power, will, creates or brings into manifestation, the new form; in other words, produces the transformation, the change, the newness.

• pariNAma-vAda (sAMkhya) is true with reference to the upAdAna, the material cause, the matter or substance which is transformed.

• vivarta-vAda (vedAnta) is true with reference to the One Nature of all the Factors taken together at once, from the transcendental standpoint (as distinguished from the empirical or experiential standpoint which sees things in succession, one after another).

This Transcendental View of Causation, or absence of cause-and-effect succession, does not in the least diminish, much less destroy, the experiential value of the Law of Karma, and does not give countenance to any immoral anti-nomi-anism, i.e., absence of (moral and other) law, as that 'You may do what you like'.

Of course, in a way, it does say to the 'emancipated soul', 'You are free now, since you know, and are therefore a law unto yourself, and you may do what you like', but it also adds, 'but be prepared for the the painful consequences of sin, for you know them also.' Every elder guardian, when handing over property to a ward who has attained majority, says: "This is yours, to utilise or to waste, as you please: you know the consequences of each way."

sAMkhya says, कारणं अस्ति अव्यक्त्तं, (कार्यं व्यक्त्तं)

kAraNaM asti avyakttaM, (kAryaM vyakttaM),
'cause is unmanifest, effect is its manifestation'.

In other words, Undifferentiated Unconscious is Cause; differentiations are effects. All effects exist simultaneously in the Cause. The Unconscious Whole is the Cause of each part, each 'conscious'.

The darshanas, 'views', philosophies, up to sAMkhya. believe in the relation of cause and effect; also that the former invariably precedes and the latter succeeds.

vedAnta does away with this, as with all other views ordinarily held, by its vivarta, inversion, of them all. It cannot be said definitively that the cause 'precedes' and the effect 'succeeds'--as a generalisation.

The seed precedes and the tree succeeds, no doubt; but only in the sense of a particular seed and a particular tree. Otherwise, the tree (another particular tree) precedes and the seed (another particular seed) succeeds; and the relation is reversed.

Therefore, you may say, in the case of any given event, not that the cause precedes, but that what precedes is the cause; not that the effect succeeds, but that what succeeds is the effect.

From undifferentiated a-vyakta arises differentiated vyakta; from chaos, cosmos; from the homogeneous, the heterogeneous; and vice versa; and this, necessarily, as a rule, not as an accident. This being so, it cannot be said that such and such a thing is always necessarily cause, and such and such another, effect.

But, all the same, it is only a subterfuge, an evasion, a mAyAvic illusion; it is only 'the next best thing'; not the best.

For, in strictness, the merest change, the passing of something, a mere form, state, condition only though it be, into nothing, and of nothing into something, is impossible, impossible to understand. True satisfaction is found only when we have reduced change to changelessness.

• Then we see that there are no effects and no causes, but only steadfastness, rock-fixed-ness. Such steadfastness and shakelessness is its own necessity, and requires no external support.

• We find it in the Logion, wherein all possible sense-impressions, all possible conjunctions and disjunctions of Self and Not-Self, are present once for all, and therefore in all possible successions.

• These pseudo-infinite and mutually subversive successions make up the multitudinous order as well as disorder of samsAra, World-Process, which is the Contents of the Logion.

• And the shadow of the ever-present Necessity of the Logion, on each one of these successions, is the fact, and the source, of the belief about 'cause and effect', 'reason', 'why', 'therefore', etc.

• Each one of these successions, because included in the necessity of the Logion, appears as necessary also, as a necessary relation of cause and effect.

• Yet it never is in reality necessary, for every law has an exception, and every exception is under another law, as said before; it is only an imitation of the One real Necessity.

The counterpart of this truth is that every particular free-will, while not reality free at all, appears free by imitation of the Absolute Free-will; and Necessity and Free-will obviously mean exactly the same thing in the Absolute, aham-etat-na, which is and includes the totality of endless Becoming.

Consider the etymological meaning of 'automatic', viz., 'self-moved', 'self-willed', 'free-willed'. But it has come to mean the reverse, viz., 'mechanical', 'non-free', 'mechanically necessitated to work in a certain way'. Autonomous is now used for 'self-determining', 'self-governing', 'self-willing.' Both extremes meet in the Absolute Self.

We may express the same idea in other words, thus:

• Each one of the endless flow of sense-impressions, of motions, of successions, is an effect, of which the Totality of them is the One constant Cause;

• or again, the Absolute, or the Uni-verse, is Its Own Cause;

• or, yet again, the necessity of the Nature of the Triune Absolute is the One Cause of all the possible variations, details, movements, which fall within and make up that Tri-unity, all that endlessness of Becoming, as One Effect.

 

[saidevo]

Whole, Cause of Each Part

The Whole is the Cause of each Part within it.

This is what we have to studiously realise in this connection, in order to understand the nature of Cause, Necessity, or shakti--Energy.

The simultaneous, the changeless, the ever-complete, the Absolute, is the cause of the successive, the changing, the partial, which, in its full totality as Not-Self, is always contained within that Absolute.

When we so put it, the idea of causation presents no difficulty. But it may be said that the difficulty disappears because the essential idea of causation--one thing preceding and giving rise, by some inherent, mysterious, unintelligible power, to another thing which succeeds--is surreptitiously subtracted from the problem.

To this the reply is that there is no such surreptitious subtraction, but an entirely above-board abolition and refutation of that so-called essential idea, and of every thing and fact that may be supposed to be the basis and foundation of that idea.

We show that the idea of necessary causation, by some limited thing, of some other limited thing, is only an illusion, and a necessary illusion; in the same way in which the idea of any one of many individuals being a free agent, having free-will, is an illusion, and a necessary illusion.

The one universal Self is free, obviously, because there is nothing else to limit and compel it. Here the word 'free' may, from one point of view, be well said to have no significance at all; but from another, it has a whole world of significance.

Now, because every self is the Self, therefore it also must be free by inalienable birthright. And yet, being limited, being hemmed in on all sides, by an infinite number of other selves; each of which is, like itself, not only the Self, but also a self, because identified with and limited by, a not-self; how can it be free?

The reconciliation is that every individual jIva feels free, but is not free; it is free so far as it is the One Self, and it is not free so far as it has made the 'mistake', a-vidyA, of identifying itself with a piece of Not-Self.

It is now generally recognised, and so need not be proved in detail here newly, that the idea of necessity, present in our idea of causation, is a purely subjective factor; not created by anything or any experience 'outside' of us (except in the metaphysical sense in which the 'subjective' includes the 'objective', in which the 'outside' also is 'inside', or, as said before, the 'without' also is 'within').

Thought and Thing

'This is without, i.e., outside me', and 'this is within, i.e., inside me or my mind', 'this is objective and this is subjective', 'this is thing, this is thought', 'this is ideal, this is real'--all these are thoughts, ideas, experiences, plays or forms of consciousness which alone creates, and distinguishes between, both the factors of each of these pairs of opposites.

'This is a thing, and not a thought' is still a thought. But the distinction is made, and therefore there must be some truth in it also. The truth is twofold:

• (a) the percept of only the individual consciousness is a 'thought', is 'ideal'; that of the universal consciousness is a 'thing', is 'real' (pp. 59,189-190, supra); and

• (b) the relatively permanent, intense, strong 'thought' is a 'thing'; and the weak, passing 'thought', contradicted and abolished by other and more permanent thoughts or things, is only a 'thought'.

The distinction of individual consciousness and universal consciousness is made and grasped by the former identifying itself with the latter, and then recognising that the former is included in the latter, as part in whole. Cf. Hoffding, Psychology, pp. 130,206,208; and yoga-vAsiShTha, generally, on bhAvana-dArdhya or vAsanA-ghanatA, 'hardening of imagination', 'density of desire'.

The outside world shows only a repeated succession, which by itself is never sufficient to substantiate any notion of invariable, inherent, necessary, power of causation.

The validity of 'inductive' generalisations does not come from the number of instances observed. Limited data cannot yield unlimited conclusions. No addition or multiplication of finites can make the Infinite.

The element of necessary validity in inductions is really a 'deductive' fact; as once, so ever; as here, so everywhere; because I, that am now and here, am ever and everywhere.

This element of the idea comes from within us, from Self, from our self as willing, as exercising a power of causation, from our indefeasible feeling of an exercise of freewill, though that again, because limited and dealing with the limited, the material, is naturally always resolvable, on analysis and scrutiny, into material forces.

'Destiny' is 'Past Karma'

The question of Free-will and Necessity is discussed in SaMskRta works, mostly in terms of daiva and puruSha-kAra, 'div-ine will' or 'fate' and 'personal will' or 'individual effort', ('person' and 'puruSha' are perhaps etymologically the same);

and the siddhAnta, the 'established conclusion', from the empirical standpoint, or vyava-hArika dRShTi, the stand-point of the limited, finite, separative, individualist ego, is, that what is called daiva is only accumulated previous karma operating as tendencies, habits, character, leading tocorresponding opportunities or environments, etc.

पूर्वजन्मजनितं पुराविदः कर्म दैवम् इति संप्रचक्षते ।

pUrvajanmajanitaM purAvidaH karma daivam iti saMprachakShate |

• prayatna, vyavasAya, kRti--are other words for effort, determination, volition,
• as niyati--is another word for fate or destiny.
• baddha and mukta--are well-known equivalents for 'bound' and 'free';
• diShTa--is also used in the sense of 'pre-ordained'.
• svatantra and para-tantra--self-dependent and other-dependent,
• sva-chChanda and para-chChanda--self-guided and other-guided,
• sv-Adhina and par-Adhlna--self-governed and other-governed,
• Atma-vasha and para-vasha--self-willed and other-willed, self-determined and other-determined,

are pairs of words which express different aspects of the same idea.

Compare
न खुलु परतंत्राः प्रभुधियः ।

na khulu parataMtrAH prabhudhiyaH |--mahima-stuti and

सर्वं प्रवशं दुःखं सर्वं आत्मवशां सुखम् ।

sarvaM pravashaM duHkhaM sarvaM AtmavashAM sukham | (Manu, iv.106);

'The Lord's volitions are not controlled by others', and 'Self-dependence is bliss; other-dependence is misery'.

The word aham-kAra, in SaMskRta, stands for

• (a) asmita, '1-am-ness', egoism, the sense of separate individuality focussed and concentrated by desire, emotion, vAsanA, tRShNA, libido, will-to-live;
• (b) 'I do', 'I make', 'I act', (free-will);
• (c) 'I am the doer, actor. maker, of my own doings, etc., accompanied by elation, pride, arrogance.

All the meanings are obviously closely allied.

The One True Seeing

From the transcendental metaphysical standpoint, the standpoint of the Eternal, Infinite, Universal One-Consciousness (of aham-etat-na), or paramArthika-dRShTi, all are equally, and together, illusions. This is also a siddhAnta, or established conclusion, entirely in accord with the one afore-mentioned.

Compare Bhagavad gItA

ईश्वरः सर्वभूतानां हृद्देशे, ऽर्जुन! तिष्ठति ।
भ्रामयन् सर्वभूतानि यन्त्रारूढानि मायया ॥

IshvaraH sarvabhUtAnAM hRuddeshe, &rjuna! tiShThati |
bhrAmayan sarvabhUtAni yantrArUDhAni mAyayA || (18.61)

The lord dwells at the heart of all beings, Arjuna;
and by his power is causing all beings to resolve as if they were mounted on a wheel.

प्रकृतेः क्रियमाणानि गुणैः कर्माणि सर्वशः ।
अहंकारविमूढात्मा कर्ताऽहम् इति मन्यते ॥

prakRuteH kriyamANAni guNaiH karmANi sarvashaH |
ahaMkAravimUDhAtmA kartA&ham iti manyate || (3.27)

3.27: By the guNas of nature, actions are being performed everywhere;
one with a bewildered Self who is egocentric thinks, 'I am the agent'.

Following SaMskRta texts and observations may also be considered here.

yoga bhAShya says:

एकमेव दर्शनं, ख्यातिः एव दर्शनं ।

ekameva darshanaM, khyAtiH eva darshanaM |
The knowledge of chitta-vRtti (khyAti) is the only knowledge we have.

[All knowledge is made possible through modification of the mind, or chitta-vRtti, and strictly speaking, our knowledge is nothing but the knowledge of chitta-vRtti. So the sAMkhya philosopher PanchashikhAcharya encapsulated this idea in this pithy statement. To see an external object means to see its representation as a mental modification within. All stimuli related to a particular object go to the mind, and with their help the mind takes the form of that object. We see that mental form or vRtti and say that we are seeing the object outside. This is applicable to all forms of knowledge.
Reflections on Knowledge | Swami Nityasthananda | Prabuddha Bharata | October 2004 | VEDANTA.RU | vedanta yoga tantra Ramakrishna Vivekananda Sarada Devi Prabuddha Bharata Vedanta Keshari Swami Satyananda Saraswati Atman Brahman Shiva Vishnu Lakshmi
--sd]

Tn current orthodox interpretation is different, but another permissible one is:

एकस्मिन् वस्तुनि परमात्मनि, अनेकतादर्शनं, भेददर्शनं, भ्रान्तिः, मित्यादर्शनं ।
अनेकेषु ’दृश्य’पदार्थेषु, एकतादर्शनं, अभेददर्शनं, परमात्मदर्शनं एव एकं सत्यं सम्यग् दर्शनं ।
रूयातिः, प्रत्यागात्म मूलप्रकृत्योः पुरुष प्रकृत्योः, अन्यता रूयातिः, विवेकेन ज्ञानं ॥

ekasmin vastuni paramAtmani, anekatAdarshanaM, bhedadarshanaM, bhrAntiH, mityAdarshanaM |
anekeShu 'dRushya'padArtheShu, ekatAdarshanaM, abhedadarshanaM, paramAtmadarshanaM eva ekaM satyaM samyag darshanaM |
rUyAtiH, pratyAgAtma mUlaprakRutyoH puruSha prakRutyoH, anyatA rUyAtiH, vivekena j~jAnaM ||

'To see the One in the Many, is the On(e)ly Right and True View; to see Many instead of One, is Illusion'. The former is the 'transcendental', the latter the 'empirical' or 'experiential', view. The former underlies ni-gama, deduction; the latter, anu-gama, induction; tarka, or anu-mAna, negative or positive inference, connects the two.

• pAram-Arthika sattA is 'essential reality of being, in the true sense'.
• vyAva-hArika sattA is 'practical, empirical, existence'.
• prAti-bhAsika sattA is 'illusive appearance, false existence'.

Strictly, the second and the third are the same; they differ in degree; not in kind, as the first does.

In the mAdhyamika system, of mahAyAna bauddham, sam-vRti-satya seems to be the equivalent of vyAva-hArika sattA. The word param-Artha-satya, is common to the mAdhyamika school and Vedanta; as, in fact, are, all important ideas and many other words.

paramArtha-drShTi may also be called sam-pUrNa, or samaShTi-, or ananta-, or sama-, or sAmAnya-, or kendriya-, dRShTi, in different aspects, i.e., the complete, or all-comprehending, or infinite, or equal, or universal, or central, (centripetal) view.

So vyava-hAra-dRShTi would be khaNDa-, or vyaShTi-, or s-Anta-, or, viShama-, or, visheSha-; or apa-kendra-, dRShTi, 'the part-ial, or separative, or finite, or un-equal, or particular, or non-central (centrifugal), view.

pauruSha-karma-daiva

Regarding these views, mahAbhArata (shAnti parvam ch.239) says:

Some call it puruSha-kAra, human manly effort; others daiva, divine ordainment, yet others svabhAva, (law of) nature. But the fact is that the three, pauruSha, karma, daiva, all three are inseparable aspects of the same fact, with reference to phala, vRtti and sva-bhAva, fruit (result of action), active movement (striving), (law of) nature (which connects the two).

We thus see that the two ideas are intimately connected, nay, are different aspects of the same fact--the idea of necesary causation and the idea of causation by free-will. As the one is an illusion, so is the other, neither more nor less.

Why Strongest Wish is Free Will

Note here, in these very words, how intimately contradictions are blended together; ambi-valence in uni-valence. In one sense, the idea of necessary causation, i.e., causation by an irresistible power, is based solely on our experience of causation by our own unchecked free-will.

In another sense, necessary and free are the very opposite of each other. The word 'auto-matic', meaning 'mechanically necessary and unavoidable', and also 'self-moved', i.e., 'free', finds reconciliation for these two opposed senses only when Autos is understood as the Great Self, whose ordinances are necessarily unavoidable, because there is None-Else, even to oppose, much less compel.

In a psychological sense, while each choice, each exercise of so-called free-will, is determined by the predominant motive, still, inasmuch as that motive is nothing apart from or outside and independent of the moved individual, inasmuch as the jIva or self entertains the motive, identifies itself with it as its strongest wish, therefore the individual self feels that it is making the choice, of itself, by itself, i.e., of its own free-will, and actually does so. To be guided by a motive is to be guided by oneself as identified with that motive.

From another standpoint, from which that motive is not predominant (but some other is, as it must be, necessarily, for individual existence means attachment to a 'this' and a corresponding wish or motive), it is regarded as something outside the jIva, to be rejected and struggled against, instead of being implicitly obeyed as one's very inmost self.

In Yoga and Theosophy, this other standpoint which may be regarded as higher, is provided by the 'subtle' body or sUkShma-sharIra as distinguished from the sthU1a or grosser; these are dealt with in a later chapter.

We can understand both, only by understanding how the Changing is contained in the Changeless--
• that there is in reality no change;
• that there is in reality no succedence and no precedence, but only simultaneity;
• no causation of one part by another part, but only the un-arbitrary coexistence of all possible parts, by the one Changeless Necessity of the Nature of the Absolute;
• and that whatever appears as a particular necessity of any special relation between one part and another part is only an illusive reflection, appearing from the standpoint of the particular parts concerned, of the One in that particular 'many'.

The Necessity of the Changeless we can understand; indeed we can understand it so well that we are almost inclined to call it a truism. The 'necessity' of the 'changing' is what we cannot understand, and are very anxious to understand; but we can never understand it, in the way we imagine and describe the fact of change to ourselves; because it is the very reverse of a truism, its opposite extreme; because it is false, not a fact; because there is no change.

Only by understanding this can we understand the whole situation, by reducing change to changelessness; by realising that, while, from the empirical standpoint of the successive particular 'this-es', there appears change, from the transcendental standpoint of the universal Self, it disappears altogether in the rock-like fixity of the constant Negation of the whole Not-Self, i.e., of all the parts of the many Not-Self, at once, by Self.

 

[saidevo]

The Self's Standing Library

A slight illustration may perhaps help to make the thought clearer. A large library contains billions of different permutations and combinations of the words of a language, each permutation or combination having a connected serial as well as individual meaning. The library, as a whole, contains all these at once in an evercomplete and finished condition.

Yet if any individual character out of the thousands whose life-story the library contains, endeavoured to picture out its own life-story, realise it in every point, it would do so in what would appear to it, from its own standpoint, only a succession.

In the library of the universe, God's Mind, the volumes are countless; each volume, a life-story without beginning or end; sole author, the One Self; readers, pseudo-infinite in number and pseudo-eternal in time; they all also, only the Author Him-Self; each volume, again, tells only the same story, but in an order which is different from that of every other. Each jIva-memory too is such a library.

Soul's Life in Each Body-Cell

Or take this other case, which may come even nearer home. Each one of us is living in the whole of his body, at every point of it, and at every moment of time. But let him try to define, to realise, to throw into distinct relief, his consciousness of every one of these points of his body. So far as he can do so at all, he will be able to do it only in succession.

The whole of the universe, the whole of Not-Self, is the body of Self. The latter lives in and at each point of the former, completely, at once; lives in the way of innumerable mutually contradictory and therefore counterbalancing and neutralising functions; and it lives in each one of these points in the same way as in every other. Each point, to itself, therefore, seems to live, in these innumerable ways and functions, in an endless succession which constitutes its sempiternal, un-dy-ing, life.

That Which Is-Not: mAyA

The nature of this endless Becoming, this endless World-Process, this cause and effect combined, is embodied in that most common and most significant name of Shakti-Energy, viz., mAyA, even as the whole Nature of the Absolute is embodied in the praNava.

mAyA, as explained by books on tantra, is yA-mA reversed; yA and mA being two complete SaMskRta words which mean, when put together as a sentence, 'that which is not'; is as well as not, sad-asat, existent and notexistent; truly mysterious to the outer view.

'White' tantra-shAstra is a very important class of SaMskRta literature, of which only the veriest fragments are now extant. It seems to have dealt with many departments of physical and superphysical or occult science, especially in their bearing on yoga-practice. Most of the books now available under the name of tantra, are hodgepodges of Vedantic ideas and foul black magic practices and mystery-mongering.

For another allied word, bhrama or bhrAnti, illusion, see footnote at p.159, supra. mA, is also the name for LakShmI, the goddess of wealth and splendour, the mother of KAma, Eros; and another name of KAma is Kan-darpa, meaning elator, 'arouser of pride', and also the opposite, 'breaker of pride'.

The significance of this PurANic mythology appears when we remember them in the terms of yoga-sUtra; a-vid-yA, nescience, 'that which is not', another form of mA-yA, gives birth to asmi-ta, egoism, whence arise rAga-dveSha--love-hate, and abhi-nivesha--stubborn tenacity.

mA also means to measure, to limit; and mA-yA is thus only another form of mAtrA matter, (see pp.173,195, supra), it is the finitising, limiting principle, which makes the all-inclusive Universal appear as the separate, separatist, egoistic, individual and particular.

Matter, mother, mates, matrix, matris, matr, mAtA, all are the same; from Skt. mA, to measure; nir-mA, to make, create, manifest. Matter measures Spirit, defines it, sets limits to it, makes it manifest. So does the mother the child.

It may be noted that asmitA, 'I-am-ness', has three stages of growth and development:

• (a) 'I-am', syAm, 'may I be', 'may I continue to be', 'may I always be', 'may I never cease to be';

• (b) 'I am great', bahu syAm, 'may I be much more', 'may I be greater than others';

• (c) 'I am many', bahudhA syAm, 'may I be many and yet more many', 'may I be more and more numerous'.

In other words, (a) self-preservation (by food), (b) self-enhancement (by possessions), (c) self-multiplication (by progeny).

In yet other words, the appetites or urges of (a) hunger, (b) acquisitiveness, (c) sex.

Love-hate and the tenacious clinging to that conglomerate of thoughts, emotions, volitions, which makes up a separate-feeling personality or individuality or ego-complex, are connected with and arise out of all these forms of egoism.

The subject is discussed at length in The Science of the Emotions; also in The Science of the Self.

SaMskRta Grammar's First Aphorism

The extant tantra-books dealing with Shakti in a personal aspect, give to it a hidden name consisting of the single letter 'i', इ, even as they call various other gods by single letters. (See tArasAra upaniShad for instances.)

This letter stands naturally between 'a', अ and 'u', उ, as should also 'm', म being only the outer sheath of 'i', though it is thrown to the end, because of the fact that it appears as negation after affirmation.

But this 'i', placed between 'a' and 'u', coalesces with and disappears entirely into 'a', in the conjunction which brings out of the joined vowel-sounds, 'a' and 'u', the vowel-sound 'o'; for AUM is pronounced as OM.

This is taken from praNava vAda, mentioned before. The very first aphorism of PANini's famous grammar is, अ-इ-उ-ण; the last letter may be regarded as a blind or substitute for म्; so that the whole aphorism is the exact equivalent of A-(I-)-U-M.

This is in accordance with the grammatical rules, allowing of a double sandhi*, (coalescence of letters), of archaic SaMskRta, the deliberately 'well-constructed', 'polished', 'refined', 'perfected' language; the complete grammar of which, if we only had it, would show, as tradition says, in the articulate development of vibration after vibration, sound after sound, letter after letter, word after word, and sentence after sentence, the corresponding articulate development of the vocal apparatus, as well as of the world-system to which that language belongs.**

* Instances of this (double sandhi are frequently met with in such ancient works as rAmAyaNa, mahAbhArata, and purANas.

** See on this point, works on mantra-shAstra, nandikeshvara-kArikA, Aumkara-Sarvasva, etc.

That this coalescence and disappearance is just, is plain from all that has been said as to the nature of Shakti, which ever hides in Self; disappears into Not-Self whenever Self acts upon that Not-Self; and goes back again to Self, through and after Negation.

This it does, it must be remembered, in the one single way of lending to, and at the same time withdrawing from, the Not-Self, its own being.

प्रकृतिं पश्यति पुरुषः प्रेक्षकवद् उपस्थितः सुस्थः ।

prakRutiM pashyati puruShaH prekShakavad upasthitaH susthaH |
--sAMkhya-kArikA, verse 65

'puruSha, fixed, self-contained, like a spectator, witnesses prakRti';

This beholding, this witnessing, this 'imaginative attention', by Self, is the affirmation by it of prakRti--Not-Self; which affirmation alone gives to it all the existence it has; it is Consciousness which energises and makes possible all the phenomena that physical science deals with; per contra, the not beholding, the turning the face away from the dance, of prakRti, by Self, is the negation by it of prakRti; which negation amounts to sleep and pralaya; it is the Principle of Consciousness, in its form of Un-consciousness, (which, in practice, is consciousness of something else) which 'dissolves' the phenomena that physical (including psycho-physical) science deals with.

When we endeavour to consider it apart from the others, it will still not be separated from 'm'; and then, too, it will identify itself with the hidden affirmative, whereby power manifests and appears forth, in many-formed results and effects, rather than with the overt negative.

Shiva and shava

This has been indicated in exoteric Hinduism in the relation between Shiva and his consort GaurI; GaurI, in her many forms, is the implied and affirmative aspect of ichChA, while Shiva is its overt aspect of abolition and negation only;

शेते, सर्वस्मिन्, इति शिवः ।

shete, sarvasmin, iti shivaH |

'He who sleeps in all, is Shiva.'

गच्छति, इति गौः । ई, गति-व्याप्ति-प्रजन-कान्ति-असन-खादनेषु ।

gachChati, iti gauH | I, gati-vyApti-prajana-kAnti-asana-khAdaneShu |

'That which goes is Gauh; that which goes, pervades, produces (young), desires, throws away, eats up, is I (== EE, as in 'see'); She who does all this is Gauh-i, GaurI'.

in His being, this Gaurl hides inseparably as veritable half of His frame, so that hymns addressed to Her declare that 'it is only when conjoined with her, Primal Shakti, that Shiva becomes able to prevail and energise; otherwise, cannot stir at all.'

शिवः शक्त्या युक्तो यदि भवति शक्तः प्रभवितुं ।
न चेद् एवं देवो न खलु कुशलः स्पंदितुम् अपि ॥

shivaH shaktyA yukto yadi bhavati shaktaH prabhavituM |
na ched evaM devo na khalu kushalaH spaMditum api ||
--Saundarya Lahari (verse 1)

["O mother divine! Accompanied by you, the ever auspicious Shiva becomes capable, to create the universe. When you do not accompany him, he is not capable even to move him-self."--sd]

'Shiva', व, minus व, i, is 'Shava', शव, which means 'corpse', lifeless, powerless.

Strictly, destruction and negation belong to the Hara or Rudra aspects of Shiva; his creative aspect, in the Shaiva Agama, is called Bhava (corresponding to BrahmA of the purANas), and his preservative aspect, MRDa (ViShNu); Shiva stands then for Brahman. Current pairs of words are also Shiva-Shakti, GaurI-Shankara, Bhava-BhavAnI, etc. But GaurI (the White) has also her other aspect of KalI (the black) ; and abolition of the world's turmoil is Shiva's Peace.

बहुल-रजसे विश्वोत्पत्तौ भवाय नमो नमः ।
प्रबल-तमसे तथ्-संहारे हराय नमो नमः ।
जन-सुख-कृते सत्त्वोद्रिक्तौ मृडाय नमो नमः ।
प्रमहसि पदे निस्त्रैगुण्ये शिवाय नमो नमः ॥

bahula-rajase vishvotpattau bhavAya namo namaH |
prabala-tamase tath-saMhAre harAya namo namaH |
jana-sukha-kRute sattvodriktau mRuDAya namo namaH |
pramahasi pade nistraiguNye shivAya namo namaH ||
--Shiva-Mahima-stuti (verse 30)

[30: Salutations to BrahmA in whom rajas preponderates for the creation of the universe,
salutation to Rudra in whom tamas preponderates for the destruction of the same.
Salutation to ViShNu in whom sattva preponderates for giving happiness to the people,
Salutation to Shiva who is effulgent and beyond the three attributes.]

 

[saidevo]

Three Aspects of Shiva: Correspondences of the Three Shaktis

Because of its special connection with Negation is this Necessity, this Shakti, treated of together with Negation; not as a fourth ultimate.

This ever-present Necessity, the very Nature of the triune Absolute, of the succession of the World-Process, appears as, and is, that which we call Shakti, Might,--('It may be', 'may be', from shak, to be possible, to be able; )--Ability, Power, Force, Energy, etc.

In other words, as Negation is the Nature of the Relation between Self and Not-Self, so this Necessity, which inheres in the combination of the three, and is not separable from any, may be regarded as the Power of that Nature of Self and Not-Self which makes inevitable that Relation.

This Relation immediately flows from, or better, is only another form of, that Necessity, and the Necessity is therefore treated as being more closely connected with the Relation, i.e., Negation, than with the other two factors of the Absolute.

In this mAyA-shakti we see repeated, the trinity of the Absolute, the primal impress of which is always appearing and reappearing endlessly everywhere. Each of the factors of the Absolute repeats in itself, over again, that trinity, in the shape of corresponding aspects.

In pratyag-Atma,

• sat corresponds to etat, the manifest seat of action, whereby the existence of Self appears forth;

• chit corresponds to aham, which is the manifest seat of knowledge; and

• Ananda to na (asmi) wherein lies the principle of affirmation-negation, attraction-repulsion, i.e., desire (or want, as negation of fullness, followed by fulfilment, as negation of want or lack or limitation).

In mUlaprakRti again,

• rajas, mobility, corresponds to etat;
• sattva, illumination, knowability, to aham; and
• tamas to na (asmi), denial (of Self), darkness, dullness, grossness, inertia, heaviness, clinging, materiality (opposite of Self), substantiality, possessability.

In the mAyA-shakti of Negation, the triplicity appears as the energy of:

• (a) affirmation, attraction, enjoyability, A-varaNa, enveloping, veiling, corresponding to aham;

• (b) negation, repulsion, distraction, flinging away, vi-kShepa, corresponding to etat; and

• (c) the revolution-process of alternation, balancing, sAmya, ap-AvaraNa, san-kShepa or prati-shthApana, unveiling (the Truth) and steadying (the mind, establishing it in the contemplation of the Truth), corresponding to Ananda, the spiral dance of Shiva, tamas and na.

The meaning of this may become fuller and fuller as we proceed, for no work that endeavours to describe the essence of the World-Process, can help imitating that process (going round, and round) more or less, combining the simultaneity of all and everything in the Absolute with its gradual development in fuller and fuller repetition in the succession of 'the relative' of the World-Process.

Blinding, Misleading, Restoring and the Various Triads

There is no current triplet of SaMskRta words, like sat-chid-Ananda, or sattva-rajas-tamas, to express the three forms, functions, or aspects, of Shakti spoken of in the text above.

The words used here, at least the first two of them, are met with in the extant works of Advaita-Vedanta, as describing the workings of mAyA-shakti, but in a somewhat different sense, explained below.

The powers of

• sRShTi, creation, emanation, throwing forth,
• sthiti, maintenance, keeping together, and
• laya, or samhAra, reabsorption, destruction, neutralisation, balancing up,

which are currently ascribed to BrahmA, ViShNu, and Shiva, or rajas, sattva, and tamas, respectively, seem to mean the same three aspects, in essence.

Looked at in another way,

• samhAra would be reabsorption or attraction,
• sRShTi would be throwing forth or repulsion, and
• sthiti would be maintenance or the balancing of the two.

In this view, the correspondences of the triplets would also have to be read differently. As to these variations, see the remarks in the next chapter.

visarga, vikShepa, AdAna, i.e., 'throwing out', 'moving about', 'taking back', respectively is another triad of words sometimes used to describe the kinds of Shakti. Static, kinetic, dynamic may be regarded as another Shakti-Energy triad.

See also the note at the end of this chapter on the jnAa-ichChA-kriyA shaktis, mentioned in the purANas and emphasised by the Shaiva school of practical and devotional religion-philosophy.

• AvaraNa would then correspond to jnAna (cognition, avidyA and asmitA of Yoga);

• vikShepa to kriyA (action, the rAga and dveSha of Yoga); and

• sAmya (or 1aya of the quartet of the hindrances to yoga-samAdhi mentioned in Vedanta-works, viz., kaShAya and ras-AsvAda--which may be regarded as the unpleasant and pleasant or hateful and loving varieties of AvaraNa--and vikShepa and laya or sleep) to ichChaA or desire, the abhi-nivesha of Yoga).

The word 'correspond', in the preceding sentence, means only that

• A-varaNa (from vR, to cover up, to envelope), 'veil,' 'curtain', 'wrapping', 'cloak,' which blinds the intelligence, is of the nature of 'cognition ', but is wrong cognition; 'I', instead of knowing Self, and knowing It-Self as Self, knows not-selves, and knows It-Self as a not-self.

• So, vi-kShepa (from vi, intensive prefix, and kShip, to fling), dis-'trac'-tion, at-'trac'-tion towards a wrong object, being drawn or flung astray, corresponds to 'desire' for a not-self, and includes appurtenant 'action' also.

• To complete a triad, we may add sAmya, equi-lib-ration, or, perhaps better, sva-stha-tA, sve mahimni prati-shthitiH, return to and abiding in Self, 'firm esta-blishment in the greatness of Self.'

In plain everyday language, mAyA is asmitA-kAma-krodha, 'egoism (pride)-lust-hate, i.e., passionate egoistic desire which veils (A-vRNoti) the eyes to the Truth, and then drags (vi-kShipati) the so-blinded person into the wrong direction.

A person, obsessed or possessed and ridden by a mad desire, shuts his eyes to the truth of things, their due proportion, and the consequences of conduct; and rushes insanely in pursuit of that object.

The counter-actives of A-varaNa and vi-kShepa, attachment and infatuation, are vai-rAgya and abhyAsa, detachment from the world of sense (by surfeit and revulsion) and persistent practice of studious contemplation of Self (See The Essential Unity of All Religions, pp. 326,593-4, of second edn.).

The following beautiful lines of poetry occur on p.122 of The Mahatma Letters; they seem to be Master K.H.'s own composition, and are illuminative in this connection:

"No curtain hides the Spheres Elysian,
Nor these poor shells of half transparent dust,
For all that blinds the Spirit's vision
Is pride and hate and lust."

shakti-traya--'triad of Shakti', is referred to in the following texts, among many; they mostly mean the functions of 'creation-preservation-destruction', the three chief forms of causation-effectuation:

नमो नमस् तुभ्यम्, असह्यवेग-शक्तित्रयाय्, अखिल-धी-गुणाय ।
प्रपन्नपालाय, दुरन्तशक्तये, कदिन्द्रियाणाम् अनवाप्य-वर्त्मने ॥

namo namas tubhyam, asahyavega-shaktitrayAyä, akhila-dhI-guNAya |
prapannapAlAya, durantashaktaye, kadindriyANAm anavApya-vartmane ||
--bhAgavata, 8.3.28

"My respects again and again unto You, the formidable of the forces of the threefold potency of [making, unwinding and keeping up] the complete, unto Him who, to the intelligence appearing as an object to the senses, gives shelter and who, with His difficult to overcome energies [see B.G.16:21], is unattainable for the ones who on the path cannot control their senses." (SRIMAD BHAGAVATAM: CANTO 8 - CHAPTER 3)

नमः परस्मै पुरुषाय वेधसे, सद्-उद्भव-स्थान-निरोध-लीलया ।
ग्रहित-शक्ति-त्रितयाय, देहिनां अन्तर्भवाय नुपलक्ष्यवर्त्मने ॥

namaH parasmai puruShAya vedhase, sad-udbhava-sthAna-nirodha-lIlayA |
grahita-shakti-tritayAya, dehinAM antarbhavAya änupalakShyavartmane ||
--bhAgavata, 2.4.12

"My obeisances to the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who for the maintenance as well as the winding up of the complete whole of the material creation, by His pastimes assumed the power of the three modes while residing within as the One whose ways are inconceivable."

शक्तित्रय आत्मिका तस्य प्रकृतिः, कारण आत्मिका ।
अ-स्व-तंत्रा च सततं, विद्-अधिष्टान-संयुता ॥

shaktitraya AtmikA tasya prakRutiH, kAraNa AtmikA |
a-sva-taMtrA cha satataM, vid-adhiShTAna-saMyutA ||
--mahAbhArata, shAntiparva, ch.238

त्वं शक्तित्रय-आत्मकः, जगद्-उत्पति-स्थिति-लय-त्रिविध-शक्ति-आधार-आत्म-कत्वात्

tvaM shaktitraya-AtmakaH, jagad-utpati-sthiti-laya-trividha-shakti-AdhAra-Atma-katvAt
--bhAShya on gaNapati-Atharva-shirsha-upaniShad, at the end of Ahnika-chandrikA

By the Law of Analogy, broad correspondences would be the triads of prANa-buddhi-sharIra, biotic-intelligent-physicochemical energies, ojas-sahas-balam, vital-intellectual-mechanical élan; sympathic-cerebrospmal-muscular pathic-systems; affectional-(plexal or glandular)-sensor-motor organs, kandas (chakras, pIThas)-jnAnendriyas-karmendriyas; soma-sUrya-agni, iDa-pingga1a-suShumna nADis, (left sympathic, right sympathic, spinal cord); and so on.

 

[saidevo]

prANa and buddhi

This mAyA-shakti is said to be the prANa and buddhi, 'vitality and intelligence' of all the world;

Symbolised as RAdhA and DurgA respectively (vide devI-bhAgavata, 9.ch.50) corresponding to the motor and sensor nerves and organs, karm-endriyas and jnAn-endriyas respectively.

it is their whole wisdom and whole wealth; it is the power of desire for the maintenance of the world's things, and also for their destruction.

Many are its aspects and corresponding names.
• One half of it--that which appears in the Affirmation, "I (am) this"--is a-vidyA, nescience, error, illusion, imperfect knowledge, separative intelligence, which binds the jIva to the downward arc of the wheel of samsAra.

• The other half--which is embodied in the Negation--appears as vairAgya and vidyA (or viveka, viveka-khyAti) satiation with the pleasures (and also the allied miseries) of the world, and discriminative knowledge, clear understanding, of the distinction between Eternal and Ephemeral, which lead the same jIva on to the upward arc of the Wheel.

In its completeness, it is mahA-vidyA, fulfilled and perfected knowledge, unifying wisdom of buddhi and 'pure reason', which frees the jIva from all bondage, makes of him an Ishvara (in the strict and technical sense), and guides his life on that second arc in that condition of yoga, union, of reason with desire and action, which makes the true free-will of de-liberate conscious universal love and philanthropic activity; and thus confers true liberty, true mukti.

They who desire to grasp, or fling away, the things of the world, physical or subtle, worship Shakti in her form of a-vidyA, or vidyA, respectively, in one or other of their many aspects; they who desire the wealth and fullness of the Spirit, worship her as mahA-vidyA or parama-vidyA, the Great Wisdom.

या, मुक्तिहेतुर, अविचन्त्यमहाव्रता, त्वां
अभ्यस्यसे सुनियतेन्द्रियतत्त्वसारैः ।
मोक्षार्थिभिर् मुनिभिर् अस्तसमस्तदोषै
र्विद्यासि, सा, भगवती, परमा, हि, देवि ॥ ४.९ ॥

yA, muktihetura, avichintyamahAvratA, tvaM
abhyasyase suniyatendriyatattvasAraiH,
mokShArthibhir munibhir astasamastadoShaiH,
vidyAsi, sA, bhagavatI, paramA, hi, devi!
--Durga-Saptashati, 4.9

"You are the supreme knowledge that is the means of mokSha, which is faultless, and practiced by those who have control over the senses and are desirous of mokSha."

द्वे विद्ये वेदितव्ये इति ह स्म
यद्ब्रह्मविदो वदन्ति परा चैवापरा च ॥ १.१.४ ॥

तत्रापरा ऋग्वेदो यजुर्वेदः सामवेदोऽथर्ववेदः
शिक्षा कल्पो व्याकरणं निरुक्तं छन्दो ज्योतिश्हमिति ।
अथ परा यया तदक्षरमधिगम्यते ॥ १.१. ५ ॥

dve vidye veditavye iti ha sma
yadbrahmavido vadanti parA chaivaaparA cha || 1.1.4 ||

tatraaparaa Rugvedo yajurvedaH sAmavedo&tharvavedaH
shikShA kalpo vyaakaraNaM niruktaM Chando jyotishhamiti |
atha paraa yayaa tadakSharamadhigamyate || 1.1. 5 ||
--muNDaka upaniShad

1.1.4: To him he said, '"There are two kinds of knowledge to be acquired-–the higher and the lower"; this is what, as tradition runs, the knowers of the import of the Vedas say.'

1.1.5: Of these, the lower comprises the Rg-Veda, Yajur-Veda, SAma-Veda, Atharva-Veda, the science of pronunciation etc., the code of rituals, grammar, etymology, metre and astrology. Then there is the higher (knowledge) by which is attained that Imperishable.

Two Main Philosophies--Worships

As Philosophies may be broadly divided into those of Change and those of the Changeless, and activities into egoistic and altruistic (the division always being by predominant characteristic, never by exclusion or abolition of the other, but only by subordination of the other), so Worships may be also broadly classified into those of saguNa and those of nirguNa.

nir-guNa, the Attribute-less, is the Absolute, Its worship is the steady realisation of Its nature, in and by

• (1) appropriate perpetual vision of the Changeless, the Universal Self,
• (2) individual-self-denying, renunciant, other-helping actions,
• (3) universal benevolence, constant prayer for the peace, shAnti, welfare of all.

sa-guNa is 'possessed of attributes'; It has as many glorified and magnified shapes as the heart-desires and ideals of worshippers. As nirguNa is Shiva, 'Benevolent Sleeper in all', so saguNa is essentially Shakti, 'Wakeful Power', 'Ability';

• and all objects of worship and prayer, from the most primitive fetish to the highest gods and 'madonnas' and 'babies' of the most splendid pantheons and the most elaborate mythologies, are but embodiments, more or less concrete, of this Shakti;

• and all are as real as (neither more nor less real than) the individual selves and heart-desires of the worshippers.

• The worshippers help the gods, and the gods the worshippers, with exchange of appropriate 'nourishment', as between all the kingdoms of nature; as, indeed, between a worker and his 'instruments'; sometimes the 'instrument' is less than, in other cases far greater than, the individual worker. (Vide bhagavad-gItA, 7.21, and 3.11).

• Prayer is only the endeavour of a weaker will to put itself en rapport with, to identify itself with, and so draw nourishment and power from, a stronger Will, a greater source of Power.

prANa-prati-ShTha--'esta-blishment of prANa, life', in an image; vivification, vita-lisation, of it by mind-force, intense thought-concentration; by means of japa--litany, etc., is A-vAhana--'invitation, bringing in', nir-mANa--'formation', of a good or a bad spirit, deva or krtyA--good or bad elemental (or elementary);

(see Mahatma Letters, Index-references, for distinction between the two); which spirit is as much an instrument (only more living) as an engine, a gun, a factory, a steamship, a human or animal servant.

As regards the two main classes of 'worship'--up-Asana, here too we have the same perpetual swing between the two; the worship appropriate to ni-vRtti--Rennuciation, and the worship belonging to pra-vRtti--Pursuit.

All 'new' religions are only re-forms; from multi-farious 'idol'-worships and sectarianisms towards uni-tarianism and solidarity. So, Buddha taught philosophical religion, by reaction against the numerous more or less gross and vicious sects and worships that were prevalent.

But again, by reaction against Buddha's emphasis on the simple life and asceticism, ending in nir-vANa--'extinction'; by reaction against this, began the worship of thousands of images of Buddha, and installation of these in great temples, and luxurious ceremonial.

This culminated in the worship of hundreds of varieties of TArAs, female goddesses, and, ultimately, the Bachhanalian orgies and horrors of Vajra-YAna. Each object of worship, god or goddess, is but an apotheosis and anthropomorphisation of a desire, good or evil.

Each worship leads on, in course of time, by cyclic necessity, to the next.

The worship of mahA-vidyA is the same as the worship of Shakti's consort, pratyag-Atma, whose supremacy She ever insists on, and in dutiful and loving subordination to whom, and for the fulfilment of whose universal law of compassion to all selves, She--as GAyatriI, mother of Vedas, wisdom-illumined will that knows how to draw upon the inexhaustible stores of Nature (Shakti herself)--confides high sciences and powers gradually to the jIvas walking on the Path of Renunciation, for the humble service and helping of all fellow jIvas.

Shakti and mUla-prakRti: Same Yet Not Same

One point should be specially noted here. As there is confusion in extant SaMskRta works between pratyag-Atma and param-Atma, so there is also confusion as regards Shakti and mUla-prakRti or prakRti. And the confusion is not unnatural.

Because Shakti is connect-ed with, con-fus-ed in, both pratyag-Atma and mUla-prakRti, and is herself hidden, there is a natural tendency to regard her only as the one or the other.

Throughout devI bhAgavata, for instance, she is now identified with Self, mentioned under the epithet of Shiva, and now with mUla-prakRti. Thus, Shakti, personified, is made to say: 'Always are He and I the same; never is there any difference betwixt us. What He is, that am I; what I am, that is He; difference is due only to perversion of thought.'

But the distinction is also pointed out at the same time: 'He who knows the very subtle distinction between us two, he is truly wise, he will be freed from samsAra, he is freed in truth.' (Ref: devI bhAgavata, 3.6.2-3, verses starting with 'sadA ekatvaM...' and ending with 'nAtra shamsayaH'

Again it is said: 'At the beginning of creation, there were born two Shaktis, viz., prANa and buddhi, from samvit-- Consciousness, wearing the form of mUla-prakRti.' (Ref: devI bhAgavata, 9.1,6,7, verses starting with 'mUlaprakRutirUpiNyAH...' and ending with 'prANabuddhayadhidaivatam'

Of course it is true, in the deepest sense, that Shakti is not different from the Absolute, but only Its very own Nature, svabhAva; and, as mUla-prakRti is included in the Absolute, therefore Shakti may also be identified with mUla-prakRti, without which it cannot manifest and truly would not be.

At the same time it is desirable and profitable to make the distinction--even though a distinction without a difference--from the standpoint of the limited, wherein thought must be and move, and has deliberately to be and move, taken in its partial, 'perverted', successive, form. The fact, also, that the words are different, and are used not always interchangeably but often differently, implies that a distinction is intended between Shakti and prakRti.

 

[saidevo]

parA and aparA prakRtis

In GItA (7.14, 9.13, 7.5) also, KRShNa speaks of his daivI mAyA, dur-atyayA, 'difficult to cross', 'difficult to escape and transcend'; his daivi prakRti, divine nature or power; and again of his two prakRtis, aparA, lower, and parA, higher, the former of which, he says, consists of the various elements which sAMkhya describes as issuing from mUla-prakRti, while the latter is jIva-bhUta, (the life of) the 'jIvas that uphold and carry on the work of the world'.

The meaning of such passages would probably be easier to follow if what has been said above as to the nature of Self, Not-Self, and Energy which is the Necessity of the Nature of these two, is borne in mind.

• As avidyA, this primal Energy turns more towards Not-Self and becomes aparA-prakRti, which name is used to cover not only the force which leads the jIva outwards, but also the objective manifestations of Not-Self which it especially brings out, and into which it leads the jIva.

• As vidyA, it turns more towards Self, and is parA-prakRti, the source of subjective life; nay, which, as consciousness, in Self, of Not-Self, is life, and so includes all jlvas. (For another aspect of the fact indicated, that is to say, another interpretation of the verse, which, however, is perfectly consistent with this, and brings out only another aspect of the truth, see the NOTE following this chapter.)

• As the two together, she is daivI-prakRti, in which vidyA and avidyA coalesce into mahA-vidyA, regarded not as knowledge, but rather as Shakti, Energy, which utilises all knowledge, for the carrying on of the World-Process.

NOTE to Chapter 11
Aspects of daivI prakRti

This note is intended as a continuation of the foot-notes at pp.167,190,191,229, above, in connection with buddhi and manas, and with the triads of (i) sat, chit Ananda, (ii) sattva, rajas, tamas, and (iii) sRShTi, sthiti, 1aya.

The first two of these triads, and those of (iv) jnAana, ichChA, kriyA, and (v) dravya, guNa, karma, are, as indicated in the text of this and other works, of essential importance for clearing up much obscurity and confusion in SaMskRta literature, and for understanding the whole scheme of the World-Process.

The correspondences with each other, of the various factors of these triplets, have been pointed out here, and have been dealt with in detail in praNava vAda. But they are argued here on their inherent merits, and, so far, have not been supported by 'testimony' from current SaMskRta-works.

It is true that if, as is claimed here, metaphysics are no less 'self-evident' than mathematics, no 'testimony' is needed for the conclusions of the former, any more than for those of the latter. But the claim is obviously not admitted by very many. Also, while solutions of simpler problems of mathematics are undoubtedly clear of themselves at every step, yet when we come to more complex ones, even veterans of the science are not unoften glad to have their work checked and verified by others. With this idea the following collection of quotations and references is given here.

Four Basic Triads

As said before, the triads belonging to pratyag-Atma and mUla-prakRti repectively, viz., sat-chid-Ananda and sattva-rajas-tamas, especially the latter, are to be found at every turn in the old books.

But the vitally important triad belonging to Shakti as Cause or kAraNna, viz., jnAna-ichChA-kriyA, is, for some reason, rare. So also is that which belongs to Shakti as Condition or nimitta, viz., desha-kAla-kriyA, or Space-Time-Motion; kriyA here being sometimes replaced by avasthA or krama or hetu or nimitta, so that the triplet becomes equivalent to place-time-circumstance.

Yet without its due application in the work of interpretation, the ideas, facts and laws, of brahma-vidyA and Atma-vidyA, metaphysic and psychology, do not become a-par-okSha==directly experienced; do not come home; are not realised in the first person.

Even in the Tantra literature of the ShAkta school, the present writer has been informed by friends learned therein, Shakti is usually referred to as tri-guNA, and its three forms of subdivisions are mentioned only as sattvikI, rAjasI, and tAmasI Shaktis. It is therefore desirable to gather together, for the purpose of confirming, with additional confidence 'the reasoned faith' of the reader, by means of 'trustworthy testimony' out of the experience of the ancients, these rare statements, scattered here and there over distant parts of SaMskRta literature.

The correspondences may first be tabulated for convenient reference.
.....chit.....sattva.....jnAna.....guNa
.....sat......rajas......kriyA.....karma
.....Ananda...tamas......ichChA....dravya

• The first triad belongs to Universal Consciousness;
• the second to Universal Matter;
• the third, to individualised consciousness;
• the fourth to particularised matter.

It is rather curious that none of the earliest, best known, and most studied 'major' ten upaniShads mentions sattva-rajas-tamas expressly. If we include two more among the 'major', viz., shvet-Ashvatara and kaushItaki, as is sometimes done, because Shankar-Acharya has commented on them, then we find that shvet-Ashvatara uses the word tri-guNa, without separately naming the three; but Shankara names them as the three. The same upaniShad says that the sva-bhAvika shakti of the Supreme is triple, jnAna-bala-kriyA: here clearly, ba1a, 'power', 'strength', stands for ichCha, desire-force (see shveta., 4.5; 5.5-12; 6.2-4,8). Among the later 'minor' upaniShads, jAbAla, kRShNa, rAma-pUrva-tApini, nAda, tripad-vibhuti-nArAyaNa, maitri, maitreyI, equated with pashyantI; yet ichAhA sits midway too between jnAana and kriyA.

(For the SaMskRta verses of the passages quoted below, check the book from p.250 onwards.)

devI-bhAgavata
tatvaj~jAnAdibhutaM ... ichChA-j~jAna-kriyAshrayam--7.ch.32

"The Supreme Being, whose garment is 'sat-chit-Ananda', appears densified by karma in a material body, which becomes the locus of the attributes or faculties of cognition-desire-action."

Thirty-five Million Nerves

devI-bhAgavata, 7.ch.35
vishvaM sharIram ... ichChA-jnAna-kriyAtmakam

gorakSha, mukti-sopAna
iDApi~galasuShumanAH ... jyotiromiti

nirukta 7.2.1; See also GItA, 15.12.
titna eva devata ... sUryon dyusthAnH

The purport of these last quotations is that 'out of thirty-five millions of nerves in the human body, ten are chief; out of these ten, three are the most vitally important, viz., iDA, pinga1A, and suShumnA, which respectively run along left, right, and middle of the spinal column, and correspond with Chandra, SUrya, and Agni (i.e., Moon, Sun, and Fire, or middle, upper, and lower, or bhuvaH, svaH, and bhuH, or astral, mental, and physical worlds respectively), and with ichChA,jnAna, and kriyA'.

Three Principal Deities

devI-bhAgavata
ahamo mahatashchaiva ... shaktidA--12.ch.4
ichChAshaktyA kriyAshaktyA j~jAnashaktyA samanvitA |--12.ch.4

'Thou art sung as the Nature of mahan-Atma, (mahat-buddhi); thou art hymned as shabala-brahma, in Balanced Repose: thou art also the Supreme Might beyond all. Thou givest us ichChA-kriyA-jnAna.'

(ii) The succeeding extracts show the correspondences of ikshA-kAma-tapana, jnAna-ichChA-kriyA, with jnAna-bala-kriyA, SarasvatI-KALI-LakShmI, chit-Ananda-sat, sattva-tamas-rajas, ViShNu-Rudra (Shiva)-BrahmA, and sukShma-kAraNa-sthUla (i.e., astro-mental--causal--physical) bodies, respectively.

upodghAta of guptavatI-TIkA
on durgA-sapta-shatI

... 'tadaikShat bahu syAm prajayoya', 'soakAmayata', 'tattapoatapyata', 'tattapoakuruta', ityAdi ... shaktorapi trirUpatvam +
mahAsarasvati cite! mahAlakShmi sadAtmike!,
mahAkAli AnaMdarUpe! tvattatvaj~jAnasiddhaye,
anusaMdadhmahe, chaMDi! vayaM tvAM hRudayAmbuje |

on rahasya-tarva
mahAlakShmIrbrahmatvaM mahAkAli rudratvaM, mahAsarasvati ViShNutvaM prapede |

Three Deities and Three Bodies
devI-bhAgavata

rajoguNAdhiko brahmA, ViShNuH satvAdhiko bhavet,
tamoguNAdhiko rudraH sarvakAraNarUpadhRuk |
sthUladeho bhaved brahmA, liMgadeho hariH smRutaH;
rudrastu kAraNo dehaH, turIyastvahameva hi |--12.8.

jnAana-ichCha-kriyA correspond to vijnAnamaya-manomaya-prANamaya koshas and Isha-sUtra-virat or sarvajna-hiraNyagarbha-vAishvanAra and prAjna-taijasa-vishvAnara also. (See vedanta-sAra, and Advanced Text Book of Sanatana Dharma, p.170)

tasya checChAsbhyahaM, daitya! sRujAmi sakalaM jagat |
sa mAM pashyati vishvAtmA, tasyAhaM prakRutiH shivA | --3.6.

ichChAsbhyahamiti, "parAsya shaktirvividaiva shrUyate, svAbhAviki
j~jAnabalakriyA cha" iti shrutyuktabalashabdoditA |
"ichChAshaktirumA kumArI" iti shiva-sUtroditA chetyarthaH |
--Nilakantha, TIkA on above.

How can Maha-KALI and Rudra, the Destructive Aspect, be connected with Ananda, Joy? Joy results from fulfilment of Desire: and Desire is Hate as well as Love. The Victor in battle triumphs and rejoices. Rudra and KALI are usually represented as dancing; macabre though that dancing be.

 

[saidevo]

(iii) The same correspondences are supported by the following, with the further statement that creation--preservation--destruction (sRShTi--sthiti--laya) belong to rajas--sattva--tamas respectively.

devI-bhAgavata

निर्गुणा य सदा नित्या व्याकृता अविकृता शिवा,
योगगम्या अखिल आधारा तुरीया या च संस्थिता ।
तस्यास्तु सात्विकी शक्ती राजसी तामसी तथा,
महालक्ष्मीः सरस्वती महाकालीति ताः स्त्रियः ॥

nirguNA ya sadA nityA vyAkRutA avikRutA shivA,
yogagamyA akhila AdhArA turIyA yA cha saMsthitA |
tasyAstu sAtvikI shaktI rAjasI tAmasI tathA,
mahAlakShmIH sarasvatI mahAkAlIti tAH striyaH ||--1.2

विष्णो च सात्विकी शक्तिस्तया हीनो अप्यकर्मकृत् ।
दृहिणे राजसी शक्तिर्मया हीनोह्यसृष्टिकृतः ।
शिवे च तामसी शक्तिस्तया संहारकारकः ॥

viShNo cha sAtvikI shaktistayA hIno apyakarmakRut |
dRuhiNo rAjasi shaktirmayA hInohyasRuShTikRutaH |
shivo cha tAmasI shaktistayA saMhArakArakaH ||--1.8

Ne-science and True Science

(iv) Shakti as sa-guNA--'possessed of properties', 'in operation', 'functioning', 'kinetic', and as a-vidyA--ne-science, error, passion, is the object of adoration to the 'pursuant', those whose minds are turned world-wards; (in all the thousands of different forms of objects of devotion which persons worship in any time or clime, in accord with their particular shades of heart-desire and stages of intellectual development).

As nir-guNA--'functionless', static, and as vidyA--true-science, true-knowledge, realisation, she is revered by the renunciant, who wants 'Self-dependence', the supreme bliss of mokSha--the liberty of the Higher Self, 'freedom' from 'dependence on an-Other', which dependence on another (the lower self) is the supreme misery.

The worship of nirguNa shakti is the same as the worship of Shiva (the Supreme Self), who also is said, in Puranic symbology, to bestow mokSha. Many schools of thinkers and devotional systems of votaries give her many names: 'tapas, tamas, jaDa, a-jnAna, mAyA, pradhAna, prakRti, shakti, aja, vi-marsha, a-vidyA; and so on. None is despised for lacking ViShNu or Rudra; everyone is scorned who lacks Shakti--Power. She is also known as mahA-mAyA, niyati, mohinI, prakRti, vAsanA, bhuvan-eshvarI, the Meaning of praNava, the Desire of the Infinite'.

devI-bhAgavata

सगुणा निर्गुणा सा तु द्विधा प्रोक्ता मनीषिभिः ।
सगुणा रागिभिः सेव्या निर्गुणा तु विरागिभिः ।

saguNA nirguNA sA tu dvidhA proktA manIShibhiH |
saguNA rAgibhiH sevyA nirguNA tu virAgibhiH |--1.8

स्वातंत्र्येण चरिष्यामि तपस्तीव्रं सदैव हि ।
पारतंत्र्यं परं दुखं, मातः! संसारसागरे ।
स्वातंत्र्यान्मोक्षमित्याहुः पंडिताः शास्त्रकोविदाः ॥

svAtaMtryeNa chariShyAmi tapastIvraM sadaiva hi |
pArataMtryaM paraM dukhaM, mAtaH! saMsArasAgare |
svAtaMtryAnmokShamityAhuH paMDitAH shAstrakovidAH ||--5.16

चेतसा निर्विकल्पेन यां ध्यायंति मुनीश्वराः ।
प्रणवार्थस्वरूपां तां भजामो भुवनेश्वरीम् ॥

chetasA nirvikalpena yAM dhyAyaMti munIshvarAH |
praNavArthasvarUpAM tAM bhajAmo bhuvaneshvarIm ||--7.27

महामाया इति, अविद्या इति, नियतिः, मोहिनी, इति च ।
प्रकृतिः, वासना, चापि, तव इच्छा, अनन्त! कथ्यते ॥

mahAmAyA iti, avidyA iti, niyatiH, mohinI, iti cha |
prakRutiH, vAsanA, chApi, tava ichChA, ananta! kathyate ||
--Madhava: sarva-darshana-sangraha, pUrNa-prajna-darshana

For other verses, whose purport is given above, see p.218, supra. Many other names of chiti-shakti-Superconsciousness are given in the 5th ch. of mahA upaniShad, which is part of Yoga VAsiShTha.

Three guNas and Three yogas

(v) artha-shakti (arthyate--'that which is desired', is artha--object, purpose, intention, the thing meant, etc.), and dravya-shakti ('substance,' the desired object), are used in the following, in substitution for, and as synonymous with, ichChA-shakti. bala--strength, power, as a synonym for ichChA, we have noted before; bhakti is also used as such.

devI-bhAgavata

guNAnAM lakShaNAnyeva vitatAni vibhAgashaH |
... tistrashcha kathitAstava |--3.7

ViShNu bhAgavata
satvaM rajastaM iti nirguNasya guNAstrayaH |
...
dravyashaktiH, kriyAshaktir, j~jAnAshaktiriti, prabho!--2.5

dvitiyastu ahamo yatra dravya-j~jAna-kriyodayaH |--3.10

ya etAnmatpatho hitvA, bhakti-j~jAna-kriyAtmakAn,
kShudrAn kAmAn chalaiH prANaujuShaMtaH, saMsaraMti te |--11.21

yogAstrayo nayA proktA, nRuNAM shreyovidhitsayA,
...
na nirviNNo, na atisakto, bhaktiyogo asya siddhidaH |--11.20

Neutral Witness of the Three

The last three verses say that

• jnAna-yoga, the yoga-method of philosophical meditation, suits those whose temperament is not that of the men of action, who do not like restless activity;

• for persons of the opposite temperament, karma-yoga, the regulated performance of duties and of acts of self-sacrifice, is the best way of achieving the purpose of life;

• for the man of the midway, or emotional, temperament, who is neither greatly attached to, nor strongly detached from, the world, the method of devotion, bhakti-yoga, is the best.

The following verses express the same main ideas in a different setting.

ViShNu bhAgavata

उदासीनमिव अच्यक्षं, द्रव्य-ज्ञान-क्रियाऽत्मनाम्
कूटस्थम् इमम् आत्मानं यो वेद, आप्रोति शोभनम् ।

udAsInamiva achyakShaM, dravya-j~jAna-kriyA&tmanAm
kUTastham imam AtmAnaM yo veda, Aproti shobhanam |--4.20

व्यानेनेत्थं सुतीव्रेण युंजतो योगिनो मनः
संयास्यति आशु निर्वाणं द्रव्य-ज्ञान-क्रियाभ्रमः ।

vyAnenetthaM sutIvreNa yuMjato yogino manaH
saMyAsyati Ashu nirvANaM dravya-j~jAna-kriyAbhramaH |--21.14

एतत्पदं तज्जगदात्मनः परं, सकृद्विभातं, सवितुर्यथा प्रभा ।
यथा(अ)सवो जाग्रति, सुप्तशक्तयो, द्रव्य-क्रिया-ज्ञान-भिदाभ्रमात्ययः ॥

etatpadaM tajjagadAtmanaH paraM, sakRudvibhAtaM, savituryathA prabhA |
yathA(a)savo jAgrati, suptashaktayo, dravya-kriyA-j~jAna-bhidAbhramAtyayaH ||--4.31

सत्त्वं रजस्तम् इति त्रिवृद एकमादौ सूत्रं महानहमिति प्रवदंति जीवम् ।
ज्ञान-क्रिय-अर्थ-फलरूपतया उरुशक्ति ब्रह्मौव भाति सदसच्च तयोः परं तत् ॥

sattvaM rajastam iti trivRuda ekamAdau sUtraM mahAnahamiti pravadaMti jIvam |
j~jAna-kriya-artha-phalarUpatayA urushakti brahmauva bhAti sadasachcha tayoH paraM tat || -- XI.iii.

(vi) The sensor organs express buddhi and jnAna-shakti; the motor-organs, prANa and kriyA-shakti.

ViShNu bhAgavata

तैजसानिंद्रियाण्येव ज्ञानकर्ममयानि च ।

taijasAniMdriyANyeva j~jAnakarmamayAni cha |--3.5

तैजसानिंद्रियाण्येव क्रियाज्ञानविभागशः ।
प्राणस्य हि क्रियाशक्तिर्, बुद्धेर्विज्ञानशक्तिता ॥

taijasAniMdriyANyeva kriyAj~jAnavibhAgashaH |
prANasya hi kriyAshaktir, buddhervij~jAnashaktitA ||--3.26

It should be noted that, in this chapter of the bhAgavata, occurs another verse, which says that kriyA-shakti belongs to aham-kAra, whereas our conclusion is that ichChA-sbakti is its proper co-efficient or function or power. This is only one of the many inconsistencies and perplexities which seem to beset the question. But it is not impossible to solve the inconsistencies and disentangle the perplexities, by careful reference to different viewpoints.

The fifth chapter of mahA upaniShad, above alluded to, says that the same functioning appears now as manas, now as buddhi, again as ahamkAra.

• In the 'subtle regions' of mind, even broad distinctions are difficult to fix, because all is always in a fluid condition, continual flow and flux.

• In this very instance, the ahaMkAra which is said to possess kriyA-shakti seems to be what, in the last section of this note, is called manas in contradistinction from mahat-buddhi;

• and it is said to have three subdivisions, vaikArika-manas, taijasa-buddhi, and tAmasa-bhUtadi, which last is ahamkAra proper.

• vedanta-sAra assigns antah-karaNa to sukshma-sharira (also called taijasa in the individual form and sUtrAtmA in the universal); makes it consist of the three koshas, viz., vijnAnamaya, mano-maya, and praNa-maya; and assigns to these, the jnAna, ichChA, and kriyA shaktis, respectively.

Preponderance midst Inseparables

(vii) The three, sattva--rajas--tamas, are utterly inseparable though distinguishable; they manifest by turns, one preponderating, the others subordinated, at any one time and place. 'They suppress, support, produce, also, one another, by turns, and always cling on to each other'.

brahma sUtra
वैशोप्यात् तु तद्वादस्तद्वादः ।

vaishopyAt tu tadvAdastadvAdaH |--2.4.32

bhagavad gItA
न तदस्ति पृथिव्यां वा दिवि देवेषु वा पुनः ।
सत्त्वं प्रकृतिजैर्मुक्तं यत्स्यादेभिः स्यात्त्रिभिर्गुणैः ॥

na tadasti pRuthivyAM vA divi deveShu vA punaH |
sattvaM prakRutijairmuktaM yatsyAdebhiH syAttribhirguNaiH ||--18.40

devI-bhAgavata
anyo&nyamithunAH sarve, sarve sarvatragAminaH,
...
na eShAmAdiH saMprayogo, viyogo vA upalabhyate |--3.7

sAMkhya kArikA

प्रीत्यप्रीतिविषादात्मकाः, प्रकाशप्रवृतिनियमार्थाः ।
अन्योन्याभिभव आश्रय जनन मितुनवृत्तयश्च गुणाः ॥

prItyaprItiviShAdAtmakAH, prakAshapravRutiniyamArthAH |
anyonyAbhibhava Ashraya janana mitunavRuttayashcha guNAH ||--12
(see also anugItA, 21)

a-jnAna is Unreason and Unreason is Desire

(viii) The characteristics, properties, functions, consequences, implications, allies, corollaries, etc., of sattva--rajas--tamas are very numerous; in fact, all phenomena whatever are classifiable under these three. The more important ones are mentioned in bhagavad-gItA, chs. 14, 17, 18; anugItA, chs. 21 to 28; manu, ch.12. There are many seeming incongruities in these statements; but they are mostly reconcilable by the view that sattva corresponds to jnAna--knowledge, rajas to kriyA--action, and tamas to ichChA--desire. Obscurity is greatest with regard to the last, appropriately enough, one might say, for one of the principal meanings of tamas is obscurity, darkness! Thus,

सत्वं, ज्ञानं, रजः कर्म, तमोऽज्ञानमिहोच्यते ।

satvaM, j~jAnaM, rajaH karma, tamo&j~jAnamihochyate |
--bhAgavata 11.22.

"sattva is jnAna; rajas is karma;' quite plain and simple; but 'tamas is called a-jnAna', not ichChA, straight. In order to make sure that a-jnAna is the same as ichChA here, one has to go a roundabout way.

मलम् अज्ञानमिच्छंति संसारंकुरकारणम् ।
अज्ञानाद्बध्यते लोकस्ततः सृष्टिश्च संस्थितिः ॥

malam aj~jAnamichChaMti saMsAraMkurakAraNam |
aj~jAnAdbadhyate lokastataH sRuShTishcha saMsthitiH ||
--shivasUtra-vimarshinI 1.2.

"ajnAna is mala, seed of samsAra"; it is obviously the same as a-vidyA. The synonyms of a-jnAna, given in one of the quotations in (iv) above, help to show that it stands for ichChA.

bhagavad-gItA, (3.37, 7.27; 10.11; 14.5-17), is perplexing. It puts together:

• (a) sattva, nirmalatva or freedom from impurity, prakAsha or illumination, an-Amaya or freedom from disease, sukha or joy, jnAna or knowledge;

• (b) rajas, rAga or attachment, trshNA or thirst for life, karma or action, lobha or greed, pravRtti or activity, Arambhah karmaNAm or initiation of new actions and enterprises, ashamaH or restlessness, spRhA or desire (whether emulous or envious), duHkha or pain;

• (c) tamas, ajnAna or ne-science, ignorance, error, moha or confusion and blind clinging, avaraNa or veiling, pramAda or carelessness, inadvertence, A-lasya or indolence, nidrA or sleep, a-prakAsha or non-illumination, and a-pravRitti or non non-enterprise, dis-inclination.

About the alliances of sattva here, there is no difficulty. The connection of rajas with rAga, trshNA, lobha, requires explanation; the text says, in full, that rajas is rAg-Atmaka, 'ensouled by attachment', is trshNA-sanga-samudbhava, 'is born of, or gives birth to, addiction to the thirst for life, the will to live', and 'rajaso lobhah sanjAyate', 'greed is born from rajas'.

The reconciliation may be found in these turns of phrase. pra-mAda seems to be derived from the same root as the English word 'madness'. Its fellow-derivatives are madana, the 'maddener' or Eros-Cupid, mada or pride, also intoxication, un-mada or madness, madya, alcohol, etc.

mohana has an allied sense also. tamas, a-jnAna, a-vidyA, moha, pra-mAda, AvaraNa, mala, etc., all stand for blind clinging, obstinate arbitrary desire which throws a veil over the luminous eye of reason, blinds it, overpowers knowledge, is thoughtless, capricious, un-reason-able, is, in fact, the very essence of un-reason, a-jnAna.

Love-Hate, Desire, Passion, is obviously arbitrary Un-Reason. Unreasoning passion, as Love, creates; as Hate, destroys: Reason only mediates, maintains, brings about sthiti or pAlana, preserves, keeps up some sort of balance between the two, helps to make law and order: as ViShNu-sattva between Brahma-rajas and Rudra-tamas.

tamas and moha sometimes mean unconsciousness, swooning, and slumber. In excessive 'perplexity' over conflicting desires and interests, 'not-knowing' what to do, persons faint away, and then they come out of that trance or slumber with some one desire preponderating.

A moment of moha or laya, oblivion, 'the waters of Lethe', intervenes at every change of 'heart', every change of strong desires or states of being, or worlds or planes, every birth-and-death, AvaraNa-vikShepa, and constitutes an initiation, a dIkshA, in which the jIva dives into the Infinite Self or store-house of Desire-Energy and energies, and then emerges with a 'new' experience, of success or failure, a power gained or lost. The moment of 'confusion' experienced by one learning to swim, between the imminent drowning and the sudden floating at ease, is a familiar illustration.

 

[saidevo]

Forms of Un-Reason

Some other helpful texts are,

manu smRti

सत्त्वं ज्ञानं, तमोऽज्ञानं, रागद्वेषौ रजः स्मृतं ।
सत्त्वस्य लक्षणं धर्मः, रजसस्तु अर्थ उच्यते ।
तमसो लक्षणं कामः; श्रेष्टयं एषां यथोत्तरं ॥

sattvaM j~jAnaM, tamo&j~jAnaM, rAgadveShau rajaH smRutaM |
sattvasya lakShaNaM dharmaH, rajasastu artha uchyate |
tamaso lakShaNaM kAmaH; shreShTayaM eShAM yathottaraM ||--12.24-26,38.

[The actual quotes referred to are:

सत्त्वं ज्ञानं, तमोऽज्ञानं, रागद्वेषौ रजः स्मृतं ।
एतद् व्याप्तिमद् एतेषां सर्वभूताश्रितं वपुः ॥ १२.२६ ॥

sattvaM j~jAnaM, tamo&j~jAnaM, rAgadveShau rajaH smRutaM |
etad vyAptimad eteShAM sarvabhUtAshritaM vapuH || 12.26 ||

12.26. Goodness is declared (to have the form of) knowledge, Darkness (of) ignorance, Activity (of) love and hatred;
such is the nature of these (three) which is (all-) pervading and clings to everything created.

तमसो लक्षणं कामः रजसस् त्वर्थ उच्यते ।
सत्त्वस्य लक्षणं धर्मः श्रेष्टयं एषां यथोत्तरं ॥१२.३८॥

tamaso lakShaNaM kAmaH rajasas tvartha uchyate |
sattvasya lakShaNaM dharmaH shreShTayaM eShAM yathottaraM ||12.38||

12.38. The craving after sensual pleasures is declared to be the mark of Darkness, (the pursuit of) wealth (the mark) of Activity,
(the desire to gain) spiritual merit the mark of Goodness; each later) named quality is) better than the preceding one.--sd]

bhaviShya purANam, madhyama parva, bhAga 1,ch.1;
kUrma purANam, pUrva, ch.11.

धर्मश्च, अर्थश्च, कामश्च, त्रिवर्गस् त्रिगुणो मतः ।
सत्त्वं, रजः, तमः चेति; तस्माद् धर्मं समाश्र्येत् ॥

dharmashcha, arthashcha, kAmashcha, trivargas triguNo mataH |
sattvaM, rajaH, tamaH cheti; tasmAd dharmaM samAshryet ||

mahAbhArata, shAnti parva, ch.157

रागो द्वेषः, तथा मोहो, हर्षः, शोकोऽभिमानिता ।
कामः, क्रोधश्च, दर्पश्च, तंद्रि च, आलस्यं एव च ।
इच्छा, द्वेषः, तथा तापः, पर-वृद्धि-उपतापिता ।
अज्ञानम् एतत् निर्दिष्टं, पापानां चैव याः क्रियाः ॥

rAgo dveShaH, tathA moho, harShaH, shoko&bhimAnitA |
kAmaH, krodhashcha, darpashcha, taMdri cha, AlasyaM eva cha |
ichChA, dveShaH, tathA tApaH, para-vRuddhi-upatApitA |
aj~jAnam etat nirdiShTaM, pApAnAM chaiva yAH kriyAH ||

"sattva corresponds to jnAna--knowledge, and dharma; rajas to rAga-dveSha--like-and-dislike, and artha--wealth; tamas to a-jnAna--nescience, and kAma--desire. Each preceding one is higher and better; dharma is best and should ever be clung to. Love, hate, infatuation, elation, pride, like, dislike, sorrow, burning jealousy at another's prosperity all this is Un-reason; as also all sinful actions."

Foot-Note 2, p.136, of Secret Doctrine, vol.I, says, quoting K.P.Telang's translation of the 3 GItA-s (S.B.E.series). "The original for Understanding is sattva, which Shankara renders antah-karaNa, refined by sacrifices and other sanctifying operations. In katha (upaniShad), ... sattva is rendered by Shankara to mean buddhi--a common use of the word."

To this HPB, adds, "Whatever meaning various schools may give the term, sattva is the name given among Occult students of the Aryasanga School, to the dual Monad or Atma-Buddhi, and Atma-Buddhi on this plane corresponds to Parabrahman and MUlaprakRti on the higher plane."

Explanations, Reconciliations

(ix) The three functions or properties and characteristics of sattva, rajas, and tamas are stated more specifically and categorically in the following, in connection with chitta or mind.

चित्तं हि प्रख्या-प्रवृत्ति-स्थिति-शीलत्वात् त्रिगुणम् ।

chittaM hi prakhyA-pravRutti-sthiti-shIlatvAt triguNam |
--yoga-bhAShya, 1.i.

प्रकाशशीलं सत्त्वं, क्रियाशीलं रजः, स्थितिशीलं तमः ।

prakAshashIlaM sattvaM, kriyAshIlaM rajaH, sthitishIlaM tamaH |
--yoga-bhAShya, 2.18.

स्थितिकारणम् मनसः पुरुषर्थता, शरीरस्मेव आहारः ।

sthitikAraNam manasaH puruSharthatA, sharIrasmeva AhAraH |
--yoga-bhAShya, 2.28.

प्रकाशं च प्रवृत्तिं च मोहमेव च पांडव ।

prakAshaM cha pravRuttiM cha mohameva cha pAMDava |
--bhagavad-gItA, 14.22.

प्रीति-अप्रीति-विषाद आत्मकाः प्रकाश-प्रवृत्ति-नियम अर्थाः ।

prIti-aprIti-viShAda AtmakAH prakAsha-pravRutti-niyama arthAH |
--sAMkhya-kArikA, 12. See also 13.

सुख-दुःख-मोहाः प्रीति-अप्रीति-विषादाः ।

sukha-duHkha-mohAH prIti-aprIti-viShAdAH |
--sAMkhya-tattva-kaumudi, 12.

शांत-घोर-विमूढत्वं इति वा स्याद् अहंकृतेः ।

shAMta-ghora-vimUDhatvaM iti vA syAd ahaMkRuteH |
--bhAgavata 3.26

नमः शांताय घोराय मूढाय गुणाधर्मिणे ।
निर्विशेषाय साम्याय नमो ज्ञानघनाय च ॥

namaH shAMtAya ghorAya mUDhAya guNAdharmiNe |
nirvisheShAya sAmyAya namo j~jAnaghanAya cha ||
--bhAgavata 8.3

प्रकाशो बुद्धेः, चांचल्यं मनसः, आवरणं अहंकृतेः ।

prakAsho buddheH, chAMchalyaM manasaH, AvaraNaM ahaMkRuteH |
--Foot-note to shiva-sUtra-vimarShiNI, 3.1

"The function
• of buddhi-sattva is prakAsha or prakhyA--illumination, making known, prIti--cheerful joyous affection and satisfaction, shAnta-tA--peacefulness;

• of manas-rajas, is pravrtti, chanchalya, kriya--restless enterprising activity, a-prIti--discontent, ghora-ta--vehemence, dire-ness;

• of ahamkAra-tamas, is sthiti, niyama, AvaraNa--steady obstinate clinging to one thing and veiling of other things, with a regularly fixed purpose, and also vishAda and moha--cheerless desolate yearning and pining, muDha--perplexed and confused as to the truth, the right course of action, and as to whether the heart's desire will or will not be gained."

(See also my Yoga-Concordance-Dictionary, pub.1938; references and explanations under chitta, pravRtti, sthiti. kriyA, prakhyA, etc.)

The Ultimate In-divis-ible

The three inseparable but distinguishable aspects or faculties of chitta or mind, the single 'internal organ'--antah-karaNa, (in contact with the five external aud at least seemingly separate five sense-organs and five motor-organs), are buddhi (or mahat), aham-kAra, and manas. chitta is the summation of the three. It is, in fact, the soul with three functions, the psychical 'individual', corresponding to the body with three properties (i.e., sensable qualities, substantiality, movement), the physical 'singular', viz., the aNu or atom of which bhAgavata (2.11) says:

चरमः सद्विशेषाणां, अनेको, असंयुतः सदा ।
परमाणुः, विज्ञेयो नृणाम् ऐक्य-भ्रमो यतः ॥

charamaH sadvisheShANAM, aneko, asaMyutaH sadA |
paramANuH, vij~jeyo nRuNAm aikya-bhramo yataH ||

"The ultimate indivisible 'particular', 'many', i.e., multitudinous, but uncompounded, i.e., each separate from all others, whence arises men's illusory notion of the 'final unit' or the singular is the paramANu." (See also vaisheShika-sUtra, 1.2.3,6, for summum genus and final singular or particular, or 'infima species')."

For all practical purposes, this chitta of Yoga is manas of NyAya, its singularising, finitising, principle, principle of 'attention', of 'the hot place in consciousness' (in William James' phrase), of focus in the field of consciousness, which is the cause of the actuality of 'one knowledge only at a time', NyAya sUtra, 3.2.56-62;

while buddhi is the cause of the possibility of all knowledges simultaneously included in that infinite field; but this 'comprehensive' kShetrajna quality of buddhi is not clearly brought out in current NyAya and VaisheShika works; some of these later works however distinguish two kinds of cognition, anubhava and smRti, i.e., direct perception and memorial; and the latter is said to cover all three divisions of time, while the former is confined to the present.

• Vedanta speaks of 'the tetrad of the inner organ, antahkaraNa-chatuShTaya, viz, manas--buddhi--ahamkAra--chitta;

• SAMkhya, of mahat (or buddhi)--ahamkAra--manas;

• Yoga, of chitta with three shIla-s or characteristics;

• NyAya mentions buddhi and manas separately (sUtra, 1.1.9),
‣ makes jnAna or cognition (together with other phenomena) a 'mark' or characteristic of AtmA (1.1.10),
‣ identifies jnAna with buddhi (1.1.15), and
‣ states the distinguishing characteristic of manas to be prevention of more than one 'knowledge' (or 'experience') occurring at one time (1.1.16).

• But NyAya-bhAShya (on 1.1.16) says: "Memory, reasoning, acceptance of testimony, doubt, intuition, dreaming, jnana or knowledge, inferential conjecture, experience of pleasure, desire, etc., are 'marks' of manas; and besides these, also this one peculiarly, viz., the non-occurrence of more than one 'knowledge' at a time."

• And NyAya-vArtika-tAtparya-tIkA (on the same) seems to identify buddhi (which as said above is expressly declared in the sUtra to be identical with jnAna) with manas, thus:

बुद्धिर्ज्ञानसाधनमिति । बुद्ध्यते अनेनेति व्युत्पत्त्या मन उच्यते ।

buddhirj~jAnasAdhanamiti | buddhyate aneneti vyutpattyA mana uchyate |

Functions-Faculties of Mind

The reconciliation and explanation of all these may be found in the statements that:

बुद्धयहंकृत्मनोरूपं चितम् ।

buddhayahaMkRutmanorUpaM chitam |
--shiva-sUtra-vimarShiNI iii.1

अनुभ्यमानस्य अस्य आत्मलाभो अनुभवश्च अंतःकरणनिष्टः ।
इति मनसि रजोगुणोदये, अहंकारे तमोगुणदये, बुद्धौ च सत्त्वगुणोदयरूपायं वृत्तिः ॥

anubhyamAnasya asya AtmalAbho anubhavashcha aMtaHkaraNaniShTaH |
iti manasi rajoguNodaye, ahaMkAre tamoguNadaye, buddhau cha sattvaguNodayarUpAyaM vRuttiH ||
--Spanda-kArikA-vivRti 4.20.

"chitta consists of buddhi--ahamkAra--manas', which make up the 'inner organ'; and of these, manas expresses rajas; ahamkAra, tamas; and buddhi, sattva."

यदेतद् विषयवासनाच्छुरितत्वात् नित्यं तदध्यवसायादिव्यापारबुद्ध्यहं-
कृन्मनोरूपं चितं, तदेव अतति, चिदात्मकस्वस्वरूपाख्यात्या
सत्त्वादिवृत्त्यवलंबनेन योनी: संचरति, इति आत्मा अणुरित्यर्थः ।

yadetad viShayavAsanAchChuritatvAt nityaM tadadhyavasAyAdivyApArabuddhyahaM-
kRunmanorUpaM chitaM, tadeva atati, chidAtmakasvasvarUpAkhyAtyA
sattvAdivRuttyavalaMbanena yonI: saMcharati, iti AtmA aNurityarthaH |
--shiva-sUtra-vimarShiNI 3.1.

अणुः जीवः, अणिति श्वसिति इति अणुः, देहपुर्यष्टकप्राणाद्याश्रयः चित्तमयः प्रमाता ।

aNuH jIvaH, aNiti shvasiti iti aNuH, dehapuryaShTakaprANAdyAshrayaH chittamayaH pramAtA |
--shiva-sUtra-vimarShiNI, Appendix 4.

Desire-Force as jIvas

इच्छा शक्तितमा कुमारी ।

ichChA shaktitamA kumArI |
--shiva-sUtra-vimarShiNI, 1.13.

चितं वै वासनात्मकम् ।

chitaM vai vAsanAtmakam |
--yoga vAsiShTha, chUdAlA-upAkhyAna,

• This three-functioned mind or chitta is aNu, atomic, because it 'breathes' aniti, expands and contracts, and keeps moving incessantly, atati, and hence is called the AtmA-jIva-aNu;

• AtmA, really Omnipresent, therefore motionless, appears as moving (atati) when, colored by desire-vAsanA, it puts on a-khyAti (a-vidyA, a-jnAna), non-knowledge or forgetfulness of Its-Own-Nature, and, instead of Omnipresent, becomes aNu, a limited atom;

• when enveloped in the triple organ and the five tan-mAtras, it is the experiencer-chitta;

• this sheathing is due to desire, will to live: the essence and core of mind may well be said to be desire;

• while, no doubt, the three aspects of the mind are co-equal, yet, if a 'distinction between the prophets' may be made at all, we would have to say that very soul of soul is desire;

• for desire, emotion, the ruling passion, makes the individuality, the peculiarity and character of the person, is the individualising, finitising, characterising, distinguishing principle; any given person feels his separate existence most fully and keenly when he is expressing a particular emotion most intensely;

• creation of kRtyAs, (Tibetan tulku) 'artificial' elementals and devas, by means of mantras, i.e., manana, ideation, with intense desire, is only an illustration of this fact, as also the theosophical doctrine of 'individualising' of souls from lower into human kingdom under stress of intense emotion, like 'crystallisation' under stress of chemicophysical forces corresponding to emotions;

• 'desire is the shakti par excellence, shakti-tama;' cognition and action are shaktis only with the energy borrowed from desire.

This is also the significance of the otherwise somewhat obscure verse:

अपरा इयम्, इतस् तु अन्यां प्रकृतिं विद्ध मे पराम् ।
जीवभूतां, महाबाहो! यया इदं धार्यते जगत् ॥

aparA iyam, itas tu anyAM prakRutiM viddha me parAm |
jIvabhUtAM, mahAbAho! yayA idaM dhAryate jagat ||
--Bhagavad-Gita vii.5.

"My parA or higher prakRti is that which manifests as jIvas, souls, individuals (of countless grades of definition, group-souls, etc., one within another), and thereby carries on and upholds this moving world."

In other words, this parA-prakRti is much the same as daivi-prakRti or shakti, energy, force; and aparA-prakRti is mUla-prakRti, matter. The three guNas, in different aspects, belong to both, as indeed also to Spirit or pratyagAtmA.

Energy, force, power, though abstract, in a general sense, yet always manifests as, in, and through, concrete 'individuals', human and non-human. Hence inevitable morphisation of the one Atma-shakti, in many degrees of definition,

• first into pratIka-s, nature-forces of the Vedas, Agni, Mitra, VaruNa, Indra, SUrya etc., distinguished by functions, without ascription of any sharply-defined concrete human or other shapes;

• and then into pratima-s, more concretely anthropomorphic deities of Puranas, with well-defined but changeable shapes in subtler matter, as abhimAni devatAs, ruling over and guiding (not so much intellectually as vitally and inspirationally) masses of corresponding 'nature-spirits' of all kinds, made of subtler or superphysical matter,

• or consisting of vegetable and animal bacteria and bacilli (yakshANi and rakshAmsi--after whom human or semi-human races of yaksha-s and rAkshasa-s seem to be named, because of the prevalence of such microbes in their bodies),

• as also 'animal-souls' of masses of animals and men;

• and finally into quite human and historic deities, avatAras, of Puranas and other national legends and sagas, ruling more intellectually (comparatively) 'rational-souls' of masses of men.

 

[saidevo]

Singular and Universal--Identical

The already-quoted verses of bhAgavata (8.2), speaking of 'triple Shakti, of the nature of I-feeling, egoism', indicate the same thing as the GItA-verse.

This aham-dhIH, 1 -feeling, is aham-kAra of sAMkhya and Vedanta, and asmitA of Yoga, which is but the second stage, phase, or form of a-vidyA--primal Error, by which the Infinite illusorily regards itself as a finite 'body', 'an atom', and 'finitises' itself.

This aNu, or ANava-mala, 'atom stain' or 'atom-substance', takes the place, as the third subdivision of energy, viz., sAmya, mentioned on p.238, supra, from a different standpoint.

गोपितस्वमहिम्रो ऽस्य, संमोहाद् विस्मृतात्मनः ।
यः संकोचः, स एवास्य आणवो मल उच्यते ॥
स्वातंत्रयहानिर्बोधस्य, स्वातंत्रयस्यापि अबोधता ।
द्विधा आणवं मलम् इदं स्वस्वरूपापहानितः ॥

gopitasvamahimro &sya, saMmohAd vismRutAtmanaH |
yaH saMkochaH, sa evAsya ANavo mala uchyate ||
svAtaMtrayahAnirbodhasya, svAtaMtrayasyApi abodhatA |
dvidhA ANavaM malam idaM svasvarUpApahAnitaH ||
--shiva-sUtra 6.1.3.

We have seen above that manas, chitta, or jIva is aNu: upaniShads repeatedly declare that Brahman, Supreme AtmA, is 'larger than the largest and smaller than the smallest', is infinite and infinitesimal both, (the word for 'large', viz., mahAn, having a special fullness of significance which will appear in a moment).

We have also seen that one of the quotations above, from bhAgavata, expressly says that the 'atom', the 'final singular', is 'many' and yet also the cause of the illusion of singularity, 'oneness', i.e., of many ones. A quotation from spanda-kArtkA-vivRti will help to show how 'extremes meet', and not only meet but are identical.

परमार्थे तु नैकत्वं पृथक्‍त्वाद् भिन्नलक्षणम् ।
प्रथक्‍त्वैकत्वरूपेण तत्त्वमेवं (?कं) प्रकाशते ॥
यत्पृथक्‍त्वमसंदिग्धं तदेकत्वान्न भिद्यते ।
यदेकत्वमसंदिग्धं तत्पृथक्‍त्वान्न भिद्यते ॥
द्यौः क्षमा वायुरादित्यः सागराः सरितो दिशः ।
अंतःकरनतत्वस्य भागा बहिरवस्थिताः ॥

paramArthe tu naikatvaM pRuthak^tvAd bhinnalakShaNam |
prathak^tvaikatvarUpeNa tattvamevaM (?kaM) prakAshate ||
yatpRuthak^tvamasaMdigdhaM tadekatvAnna bhidyate |
yadekatvamasaMdigdhaM tatpRuthak^tvAnna bhidyate ||
dyauH kShamA vAyurAdityaH sAgarAH sarito dishaH |
aMtaHkaranatatvasya bhAgA bahiravasthitAH ||--4.21

"In transcendental and supreme experience, oneness or identity is not distinguishable from 'separate' (or rather complete and perfect) singularity (kevalatA, of yoga). Separate-singularity which has no fringe of uncertainty of any kind about it, cannot be distinguished from true (universal) oneness; and vice versa. In that supreme experience, the broad firmament, all-bearing earth, ambient air, blazing sun, rolling oceans, rushing rivers, ever-receding quarters of space all these are seen to be but portions, projected without, of the one my 'internal organ' within" i.e., they are all seen as constituents of the One impartible Consciousness which has illusorily divided itself up into a 'without' and a 'within'. 'Empirical' and 'universal' Ego are identical.

Mind is World-Process

Following verses of yoga vAsiShTha, 3.ch.84, are to same effect.

चित्तमेव हि संसारो, रागादिक्लेशदृषितम् ।
तदेव तैर्विनिर्मुक्तं, भवान्तः इति कथ्यते ॥
गर्वं अभ्यन्तरे चित्तं बिभर्त्ति त्रिजगन्नभः ।
अहं आपूर इव तद् यथाकाले विजृम्भते ॥
योऽयं चित्तस्य चिद्भागः, सा एषा सर्वार्थबीजता ।
यच्चास्य जडभागश्च, तज्जगत्, सो, अङ्गः!, संभ्रमः ।
चित्तं साध्यं, पालनीयं, विचार्यं, कार्यं आर्यवत् ॥

chittameva hi saMsAro, rAgAdikleshadRuShitam |
tadeva tairvinirmuktaM, bhavAntaH iti kathyate ||
garvaM abhyantare chittaM bibhartti trijagannabhaH |
ahaM ApUra iva tad yathAkAle vijRumbhate ||
yo&yaM chittasya chidbhAgaH, sA eShA sarvArthabIjatA |
yachchAsya jaDabhAgashcha, tajjagat, so, a~ggaH!, saMbhramaH |
chittaM sAdhyaM, pAlanIyaM, vichAryaM, kAryaM Aryavat ||

"The chit-element in chitta, is seed of omniscience; the jada-element in it, is all this jagat, moving illusion. chitta, mind, contains all the World-Process within itself. It should be reflected upon, controlled, cultivated, refined."

• After all, is it not literally true, that every experience, and all that is contained or implied in it and by it, all its contents, is a mood of mind, a vRtti of antaH-kararNa, i.e., of the Self identified with, or imagining It-Self as, an antaH-karaNa?

• To think, to say, 'this is my-self's experience, that is another-Self's experience, this mountain is outside of Me'--is not all this, My experience or thought?

• Is not all distinguishing of one-Self and another-Self, together with both the thus distinguished selves, within the One Self which distinguishes?

Indeed there is Only One Self which includes all selves and all not-selves, all thoughts and all things, all subjects and all objects.

It may be mentioned incidentally, that praNava vAda makes aham-kAra the summation of chitta-buddhi-manas, instead of chitta the summation of ahamkAra and the two others. As said before, this implies only a slight difference of standpoint, an emphasis on aham rather than on kAra.

Aspects of Mind: Names Vary with Functionings: All of One and Same Mind

(10) A few quotations regarding the three 'faculties' or 'functions' of this 'inner organ' may help to make the subject clearer.

It is true that the ancient works lay stress on the indivisible oneness of mind, manas, in all its psychoses i.e., the psyche's functionings, moods, modes; thus:

कामः संकल्पो विचिकित्सा श्रद्धा अश्रद्धा
धृतिर् अधृतिः ही: धी: भी: इत्येतत् सर्वं मन एव ।

kAmaH saMkalpo vichikitsA shraddhA ashraddhA
dhRutir adhRutiH hI: dhI: bhI: ityetat sarvaM mana eva |
--bRhad-Aranyaka, 1.5.3.

"Love and passionate desire, resolve, doubt, faith, disbelief, patience, impatience, modesty, clear insight, fear--all these are but manas--mind."

These psychoses (mind's functions, mentations), are typical of the scores mentioned in different works of various schools of philosophy; e.g., Alochana--pure sensation, and pratyakSha--perception (which are the basis of all other mental operations, trayasya tatpUrvikA vRttiH, as said, in sAMkhya kArikA 30, and pratyakShaparA pramitiH, in nyAya-bhAShya, 1.1.8), adhyavasAya--or ascertainment, abhimAna--egoistic desire, saMkalpa or vyavasAya--resolve, viparyaya or viparyAsa, error, samshaya, doubt, vikalpa, imagination, svapna--dreaming, nidrA--sleep, praty-avamarSha or pratyabhijnA--recognition, ichChA--desire, rAga--liking, dvsha--disliking, kRti--volition, abhi-saMdhi--determination, anubhava--experience, presentation, smRti--memory, etc.--all these are only moods of the one mind.

brahmaNaa tanyate vishvaM 'manasA' eva svayaMbhuvA |
manomayaM ato vishvaM yan nAma pari-'dRushya' te || 50
yatra saMkalpanaM tatra mano asti, iti avagamyatAm || 52
saMkalpa-manasI bhinne na kadAchana kenachit |
saMkalpajAte galite svarUpaM avashiShyate || 53
yasya cha AtmAdikAH saMj~jAH kalpitAH, na sva-bhAvataH || 57
vikalpa-kalita-AkAra-'desha-kAla-kriyA'-AspadaM || 123
chito ruupaM idaM brahman kShetraj~jaH iti kathyate |
vAsanAH kalpayan so api yAti 'ahaMkAra'-tAM punaH || 124
ahaMkAro vinirNetA akalaMkI 'buddhir' uchyate |
buddhiH saMkalpita AkArA prayAti manana AspadaM|| 125
'mano' ghanavikalpaM tu gachChati indriyatAM shanaiH |
pANi-pAda-mayaM dehaM indriyANi vidur budhAH || 126.
evaM jIvo hi saMkalpa-vAsanA-rajju-veShTitaH |
duHkha-jAla-parIta-AtmA kramAd AyAti nIchatAM || 127
iti shaktimayaM cheto, ghana-ahaMkAratAM gataM |
kosha-kAra-kRumir iva svayaM AyAti bandhanaM || 128
kvachinmanaH, kvachidbuddhiH, kvachij j~jAnaM, kvachit kriyA |
kvachid etad ahaMkAraH, kvachii chchittam iti smRutaM || 130
kvachit prakRutir iti uktaM, kvachin mAyA iti kalpitaM |
kvachin malaM iti proktaM, kvachit tama iti smRutaM || 131
kvachid bandhaH, iti khyAtaM, kvachit puryaShTakaM smRutam |
proktaM kvachid avidyA iti, kvachid ichChA iti sammataM || 132
'manaH' sampadyate lolaM kalpanA-kalano-nmukhaM | (146)[/b]
--mahA upaniShad and yoga vAsiShTha

"Self-born BrahmA spreads out the worlds by manas:

• Wherever there is saMkalpa--ideation, there is manas at work. There is no difference between the two. When ideation ceases, Self Al-One remains. It is indicated by such names as AtmA.

• By and in ideation, Space-Time-Motion appear, and chit--consciousness becomes kShetra-jna--cogniser of the 'field', the 'This'.

• Ideating vAsanA--desires, it becomes aham-kAra--ego-ism;

• that, making determinations, free of doubt, a-kalankI, becomes buddhi;

• that, forming an 'image', becomes manas:

• that, densifying, crystallising, becomes indriyas, sensor-and-motor-organs; these make up the body.

Thus the jIva--soul, binding itself with bonds, like the silkworm imprisoning itself in a cocoon spun by itself, falls lower and lower into denser and denser matter.

This one and the same manas--Mind, according to its various functionings, is named now manas, now buddhi, now jnAna, again ichChA, then kriyA, now aham-kAra, now chitta, or prakRti, or mAyA, or malam, or karma, bandha, puri-aShTaka, or a-vidyA.

All these are but various names of various functionings of one and the same ideating manas-Mind."