soumya srajan: 2011

Walking on Paths created by our Rishis- Come! -XII
Witness self (sakshi Chaitanya) and Individual self (jiva chaitanya)
Soumyasrajan
December 06, 2011
Are there two different selves-existences?
According to our model so far, self (our absolute existence), which is absolute is eternal, free from feelings, birth or death etc. On the other hand, we generally do not feel our self at all in such sentiments.

The self with which are familiar in our thinking, feeling in our daily life is the one which feels happy, sad, active dull. The self seems to suffer with pain, hunger, thirst. We
sometimes feel active, some other time, dull or sometimes weak and at other times strong. Our self seems to be born and it dies. While there is no doubt according to our analysis, using which we have built the model so far, that our absolute existence, which we should think of, as our self is the unique Brahman itself.
It encompasses all existence and it beyond all such feelings. Then how do we explain this feeling, which is so different. Are there two different selves?
The feeling of difference is caused due to boundaries built by ajnana
In a way we have already seen the reason also. Due to ajnana, we draw “boundary” around us and start associating ourselves with a “minor part of Brahman”, identifying ourselves with our body, our mind etc. We associate ourselves with, just the time of this moment, at each moment. In empirical universe we do not, have “ability” to look at past, future etc. with the same vision as we have for the present via our sense perceptions.
Our self (absolute existence) does not feel any pain, sorrow, from etc.- each and every event of past, present or future, is by definition already a part of it
If we identify ourselves with Brahman, clearly all pain, all sorrow, all suffering, all the happiness, sadness, hunger, thirst, dullness, weakness, strength, death, birth any event, one can think of not just associated with oneself but with in any living or nonliving, all knowledge each and every thing is part of our self.
Our self (absolute existence) with such identification, clearly is beyond any feeling of pain or sorrow or time etc. each and every event is already part of it. It has been already “aware of it”; hence it will not feel any such sentiment, shape or time.
Self (absolute existence, sakshi chaitanya) is a “silent immutable witness (sakshi, drashta)” of each and every event, each and every sentiment, without being affected by it- it is an alibi

On the other hand it is always with us. Even in deep sleep it is there with us, we have given enough arguments to ascertain this fact (see part VIII-absolute existence). Looking at this scene, it is practically clear that it is a sort of witness to each and every event of our life, without at all getting affected by it. Each aspect of our life is recorded (witnessed) by it, but it neither takes part in any action, nor gets it affected by it. It is our consciousness, but all actions are taken by other elements, like mind, body etc. The consciousness is just an alibi, a witness. That is the reason that our absolute self has been called by philosophers or rishis a sakishi chaitanya (witness self or witness consciousness, pure consciousness, immutable self (kutastha)).
Jiva chaitanya (individual self)- a reflection of sakshi chaitanya
Individual self with whom we are familiar, is the one, which is identified with mind (antahkarana). Further being identified with mind, it also gets identified with the physical body and the organs. The individual self finds expressions as ego (aham) primarily through I-ness (ahamkara), a mode of mind.

This results in expressions like “I doubt”, “I am sure”, “I am alive”, “I am happy” etc. Similarly one has the general feeling “I work hard through my hands”, “as far as I can see”, “I know’ Or “my mind knows” etc. Note that all these are the modes of mind. But because of ajnana the self feels it associated with it.
Individual self – karta (doer), bhokta (experience), chidbhasa (reflected self)
It is the individual self (jiva chaitanya) which functions as cognizer, doer (karta) or experiencer (bhokta). It has such feelings because of ajnana. One can think of individual self as the reflection of our absolute existence, the witness self (sakshi chaitanya) in the empirical universe. For this reason individual self is also called the reflected self (chidbhasa).

Witness self is the only one with absolute existence and shining behind reflected self and physical objects like mind, body etc.
Note that the only absolute existence is that of witness self. It is the only one, which shines with existence in the absolute universe. Reflected self does not exist independently. Its existence is because of shine (existence) of absolute self. So is the fact with mind or body etc. The mind, body etc. are just physical objects, with no consciousness (the absolute existence is hidden in them). Their consciousness is only because of shining of witness self.
It is the witness self, who is the witness of all observations, knowledge, ignorance etc. The mental states or the individual self involved in these processes are actually manifestations of witness self, due to ajnana.
Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (Chapter III), which is associated with Yujurveda, expresses some of these facts in very poetic colorful style
“You cannot see that which the witness of vision is; you cannot hear that which the bearer of hearing is; you cannot think that which is the thinker of the thought; you cannot know that which is the knower of knowledge. This is your self that is within all; everything else but that is perishable”
Here is another nice poetic expression from Isha Upanishad (Chapter 3) for witness self and its reflection
“It moves and it does not move. It is far and it is also near. It is inside all that and it is also outside all this”
Witness self cannot be perceived by using sense organs, mind etc.? How does one understand it, identify with it to understand properly our universe?
How does one perceive witness self? It does not do anything, of the type, we are familiar with. Generally, we depend on sense perceptions via mind for our perceptions. But absolute existence is clearly beyond any such perception. It is there, even when we are in deep sleep, when all such modes of perception are not there. So clearly sense perception and all our usual methods of understanding will be of no use.

Verbal testimony, dhyana (meditation with the help of symbol), nididhyasana (reflection and right apprehension)

These are the tools to understand and identify with sakshi chaitanya (witness self). We will study more details of these ideas later in next few parts. Verbal testimony (knowledge via verbal conveyance, from an authoritative source) is an important tool in Indian style philosophies for obtaining valid knowledge, an idea quite different from philosophies developed in other countries

I can know you are happy only if you tell me
We will study in a little more about it later. Let us just now assume this idea. Vedas (specially shruti) are the most authorities sources in this respect. One problem with mental modes of another person is that they cannot be perceived by sense perceptions. I can know you are happy only if you tell me.

Knowledge via verbal testimony has to be valid and should not contradict any valid knowledge obtained using other tools.
These were the ideas which led Indian philosophers to this idea of importance of verbal testimony. But one has to be careful also. Knowledge via verbal testimony about empirical universe has to be valid and should not contradict valid knowledge obtained from any other sources, like sense perception or rational arguments etc. No statement in Veda or Upanishad contradicts our general understanding of empirical universe. It, in fact generally helps in understanding better
Mahavakyas
There are four mahavakyas in Shruti which are considered important for understanding of this model of universe as well as self.
1. prajnanam brahma - "Consciousness is Brahman"
(Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)
2. ayam ātmā brahma - "This Self (Atman) is Brahman"
(Mandukya Upanishad1.2 of the Atharva Veda)

3. tat tvam asi - "Thou art That"
(Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)

4. aham brahmāsmi - "I am Brahman"
(Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)
These sentences were written with a great understanding. But one must not get carried away and think of them as only something for singing praise of etc. They are for manana (reflection, understanding them using observations, rational arguments and other tools) And then using tools like dhyana or nididhyasana.
We will discuss these tools in more details. But to learn about them first we must have a little more clear vision of this relationship between individual self and witness self.
Analogies are very great tools to understand them. We will give some analogies in next part. Then we will also need to understand process of developing understanding and identification with knowledge, which we will discuss. With that we should be ready with discussions on these tools like dhyana (meditation) and nididhyasana (reflection and right apprehension).
Previous XI Ajnana and Cosmic maya
Next Reflection of Sun, Projective Geometry, stereographic projection
References
Images are from
http://www.collectiveself.com/self-organizing-groups2/le arning-and-self-organizing-groups/learning-about-myself-thro ugh-the-doorway-of-self-organizing-group
http://magicofawaken ing.wordpress.com/2011/03/17/understanding-meditation/
http:/ /psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta
http://gemsofindia nthought.in/category/gallery/
http://lnx.isvara.org/it/index. php?option=com_kunena&func=view&catid=11&id=4623&Itemid=1000 83
http://www.suddhadharma.net/content/prec.html
http://www.el ephantjournal.com/2010/02/why-108-sun-salutations/
http://www .indianetzone.com/38/ayam_atma_brahma.htm

By Soumya Srajan

November 13. 2011

Some History – a tribute to Rsihis, Tirthankars and Monks who built adviata model of universe

It is difficult to decide when did all this development start. Several sramaṇa movements are known to have existed before the 6th century BCE dating back to Indus valley civilization.These have influenced both the Astika (those who depended on Vedas to develop philosophies) and the Nastika (those who did not depend on Vedas) traditions of Indian philosophy. Philsophies like Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaishika, Mimamsa (and also Vedanta) are considered Astika traditions while Jainism, Buddhism, Caravaka are considered to be in Nastika traditions.

Final theory of Advaita Vedanta has come much after these, so all these schools. Over all it must have been influenced by all these ancient philosophies. Vedas themselves are supposed to have been formally scripted (so called samhitas) by Veda Vyasa, who lived in the period of Mahabharata. He seems to have lived around 3100 BCE. Some of the Jain Tirthankars lived much earlier. Only for 23rd and 24th Tirthankars Parshva Nath and Mahavir Swami one can fix dates when they lived. Parsava Nath is supposed to have lived around 800 BCE. There are statues found in ruins of Indus valley civilization which seems to be of the first Jain Tirthankar Rishabh Dev. He is also considered to be an avatar of Vishnu.

Along the Banks of Saraswati River

There is very little doubt that people who are supposed to have "written" Vedas lived along the banks of Saraswati river (Vedas were not really written initially, they were the shrutis, some thing you only heard, so not in written format, many of those hymns of Vedas from shrutis are still used in our rituals).

There are hymns in Vedas which praise Saraswati river a lot and there are also hymns which have sentiments like "oh! Saraswati, why are you deceiving us."

Remote sensing device from outer space solves the mystery behind hymns of Rigveda

For a long time Saraswati was considered by Western histroians and many Indians influenced by them to be a mythological river which did not really exist. But with recent remote sensing devices this view was shown to be false (first one was on a french satellite, we must be perhaps only country who prefer to not analyze our own history properly in the name of secularism. Though now some historians from USA, India and other countries also explore path and drying up of Saraswati.

Now it is more or less considered, a certainly that Saraswati was one of the largest rivers of India (Yamuna and Satlaj merged in Saraswati) between 6000 BC to 3500 BC. In Mahabharta it is mentioned that Saraswati had already dried up. So most likely Vedas may have originated in this period between 6000 BC to 3500 BC ). now some historians from USA, India and other countries also explore path and drying up of Saraswati. Now it is more or less considered, a certainly that Saraswati was one of the largest rivers of India (Yamuna and Satlaj merged in Saraswati) between 6000 BC to 3500 BC. In Mahabharta it is mentioned that Saraswati had already dried up. So most likely Vedas may have originated in this period between 6000 BC to 3500 BC ).

It is interesting to note that people were a bit puzzled earlier, why was it mentioned in Rig Veda "oh! Saraswati, why are you deceiving us." Now that mystery has been solved by these remote sensing devices from outer space and given meaning to these hymns.

The river Saraswati had started drying up because of geological changes in areas covered by Himalays and Shivalik. That must have caused problems to these very highly evolved cultures, who gave us so developed philosophic and scientific ideas.

Tradition of remaining nameless

One can not really identify all those who contributed to these developments in Hindu, Jain or Buddhist philosophies. A common tradition in India is not to put your name on your writings and architecture. People devoted all they did to God or Guru. It may be interesting to note than while they may have devoted all to God, there is not really any conclusive talk of God at all, in the philosophy or rituals resulting from these philosophies. Even the philosophers (Rishis) of Mimamasa School, which emphasized very ritualistic conduct, based on hymns of Vedas argued that "there was no need to postulate a maker for the world, just as there was no need for an author to compose the Vedas or a God to validate the rituals."

Hindu, Jain and Buddhist traditions about knowledge

Many today consider in ritualistic aspects that Vedas were written by God, perhaps because of such traditions. In this connection it may be interesting to note that according to Hindu and Jain philosophies, any knowledge is there eternally. Jain tradition is also that human being cyclically learn the knowledge as new one and then again, it is forgotten and this cycles continues eternally. Buddhist tradition also has similar aspects. In Buddhism, a Buddhist era starts with a Buddha and ends when his teachings are forgotten and there are many Buddhas who have existed in this world in different eras.

Guru Vandana

While we are starting to study model of universe, let us pay in Indian style and tradition our respects to all Rishis, Tirthankars, Monks since that ancient times to present times, who have given us an opportunity to learn and understand some basic ideas about universe via this model initially created by them.

अज्ञानतिमिरान्धस्य ज्ञानाञ्जनशलाकया ।
चक्षुरुन्मीलितं येन तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥

Salutation to the noble Guru, who has opened the eyes blinded by darkness of ignorance with the collyrium-stick of knowledge.

गुरुर्ब्रह्मा गुरुर्विष्णुः गुरुर्देवो महेश्वरः ।
गुरुरेव परंब्रह्म तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥

Salutation to the noble Guru, who is Brahma, Vishnu and Maheswara, the direct Parabrahma, the Supreme Reality

त्सर्वश्रुतिशिरोरत्नविराजित पदाम्बुजः ।

वेदान्ताम्बुजसूर्यो यः तस्मै श्रीगुरवे नमः ॥

Salutation to the noble Guru, whose lotus feet are radient with (the luster of) the crest jewel of all Srutis and who is the sun that causes the Vendanta Lotus (knowledge) to bloosom.