(Nov 11,2013 ) Spiritual Message for the Day – The Critique of Erroneous Doctrines by Swami Krishnananda

The Critique of Erroneous Doctrines

Divine Life Society Publication: Chapter 2 An Analysis of the Brahma Sutra by Swami Krishnananda

Sankhya is a very famous philosophy. Most people accept it. The presence of Purusha and Prakriti, consciousness and matter, is accepted and these words are used in such great texts like Mahabharata, Bhagavad Gita, Manu Smriti etc. So this will make us feel there is some truth in it. Why does the Bhagavad Gita go on using the word Prakriti and Purusha, when Sankhya is rejected by the Brahma Sutras?

The main objection against Sankhya is the assertion of duality; One thing is different from another thing. But the Samkhya forgets it is not possible to know that one thing is different from another thing unless there is a third thing which knows the difference. The one thing which is different from the other thing cannot know that the other thing exists at all. So there is a flaw in the argument. The third thing is necessary, which the Sankhya does not accept. It is caught up by a vicious argument of the self-sufficiency of Purusha and Prakriti. And even its concept of liberation is inadequate, because the Sankhya believes that separation of Purusha and Prakriti from contact of each other is liberation. But there is a defect here. Purusha is liberated from contact with Prakriti, and Purusha is accepted to be omniscient, all-pervading consciousness. But Sankhya contradicting this statement says Prakriti also exists. In liberation, Prakriti is not destroyed; where does it exist? It exists outside Purusha. Then where is the infinity of the consciousness of Purusha?

Is Purusha omniscient, all-knowing? Yes, it is. If it is all-knowing, it must be knowing the existence of Prakriti also. The moment it knows the existence of Prakriti, it gets caught in bondage. And bondage will be permanently there. The idea of liberation in the Sankhya is not acceptable for obvious reasons.

There are other schools which deny the existence of the Atman itself, like nihilism or sunyavada, a trend in Buddhistic philosophy. 'Nothing is'. Buddha did not say that nothing exists, but something followed from his standpoint. He said that everything is moving and nothing is existing at any particular point, even for a moment, like the flow of the waters of a river. Not for a single moment does the water stand at one place. The river is not a stable object; it is movement. That we are unable to perceive the continuous movement of the waters in a river is the reason why we mistake that the river is a solid water reservoir.

In the same way, the mind does not exist. The mind is only an imagined centralization of a point as is the point imagined in the flow of a river. Not for a moment does anything exist to continue to see. But Buddha accepted rebirth and samsara, from which he advocated freedom. Now what is this he is saying? Who will take rebirth? That person who is to take rebirth does not exist even for a moment, according to the accepted doctrine.

Karma is the cause of rebirth. Karma is the repercussion produced by the action of someone. This someone does not exist, because existence is momentary. Momentariness is almost equivalent to saying that it is non-existent. So who will take rebirth? How will suffering be explained? - which Buddha emphasized very much – there is suffering, we have to overcome suffering.

This peculiar difficulty in understanding the real point behind what Buddha said created a discussion by another set of Buddhists leading to nihilism. If everything is momentary, neither does samsara exist nor does karma exist. Non-existence is the final word of nihilistic philosophy. But the nihilists made the same mistake as the Sankhya doctrine became self-contradictory.

Sankhya looked very logical, very acceptable, very beautiful from outside, but inside it was vacuous due to the defects already pointed out. So is this so-called boast and adumbration of nihilism, sunyavada. Who is saying that nothing exists? Who is talking? Is the non-existence itself saying that non-existence is there? Does the philosopher of nihilism exist? If the philosopher of nihilism does not exist because nihilism abolishes the existence of everyone, then who is making a declaration that nothing exists?

The Vedanta comes in and says this argument cannot be accepted. Brahma Sutra refutes it. There must be someone to know that nothing exists. That someone must be existing. The Western philosopher Rene Descartes concluded as a wise one that the consciousness that everything is doubtful cannot itself be doubted. "Therefore "I am"."

In a similar way, the Vedanta accepts that there should be an awareness of, there being nothing. If sunyavada accepts that there is an awareness which alone can say 'nothing exists', then the doctrine of nothingness is defeated and then Something is.

There are various schools of Buddhist philosophy. There is the Ethical Idealism of Buddha, which emphasized the momentariness of things though he was a very highly ethical person. But the others went to extremes and there are four extreme types, offshoots of Buddhist psychology and philosophy. One of them is called yogachara or vijnanavada. This is totally refuted by the Brahma Sutras in the second chapter.

All that you see outside is the creation of the mind. This is the basic principle of vijnana-vada. Vijnana is the consciousness in the mind or consciousness itself as the mind, which projects itself as an outside world of perception. The world actually does not exist. The Vedanta refutes this position. The Commentary of Acharya Sankara is long on this particular Sutra. "The non-existence of the world cannot be accepted."

Oh! What is Sankaracharya saying? What is Sutra telling? Is the world really existing? Are you contradicting your own Vedanta doctrine that the world ultimately does not exist? Why are you fighting with this Buddhist psychology?

The Vedanta is a very difficult subject. 'In what sense is the world existing and in what sense is it not existing?' – must be first clear to the mind.

That there is nothing at all outside, and it is only the mind moving outside as is proclaimed by the vijnanvada theory of Buddhism, is refuted. Why is it refuted? Acharya Sankara's commentary is elaborate, worth reading again and again. Beautiful! If there is nothing outside, if the consciousness appears to be outside according to your doctrine, this doctrine cannot be accepted because "how did the idea of 'outsideness' arise in the mind?" If the mind is wholly inside and is not outside, and it only projects itself as if it is outside, how did the idea of outsideness arise at all? A non-existent idea, an impossible idea cannot arise in the mind.  Even if you agree that there is some appearance outside, and really things do not exist, the appearance has to be outside. This outsideness must be accepted first. How did things appear 'outside' even though they may be only mental? The mind is inside; you will see the whole world dancing inside your head. Why does it not happen? Why is there the idea of 'an outside'?

There is an outright condemnation and criticism of vijnavada that you cannot go on saying that there is an appearance of something being outside unless there is really something outside. A rope appears as a snake but even for that appearance, the rope must be existing. If rope also does not exist, then the snake will not be there.

Now, the other side comes in. Does Vedanta accept that there is a world, when it says that vijnanavada is wrong? There are two degrees of reality. One degree is called vyavaharika satta; another degree is called paramarthika satta.

The object and the subject are on par with each other. Anything that is above your mental operation cannot be known by you. Anything that is below your mental operation also cannot be known. You cannot know heavens because they are above the operations of your mind. You cannot know hell because it is below the operation of your mind. You can see only empirical existence because the mind is an empirical phenomenon. Now, the question whether the world exists or not should not arise at all, because the existence of a thing is nothing but the acceptance by the mind that something outside is existing. When consciousness accepts that there is something, it exists. You cannot deny its existence, because who will deny it? Consciousness accepts it. The world is seen; now, which consciousness is accepting it? The empirical consciousness which is subjectively engaged in this physical body is accepting that there is something outside, because anything that is inside should also accept that there is something outside. You cannot say 'my mind is inside'. Who told you that the mind is inside? Because you have differentiated your mind from something outside. If the outside thing does not exist, the inside also cannot exist. There is a clash between the inside and the outside in ordinary perception. The subject and object contradict each other. Therefore the mind cannot know the nature of the world correctly, nor can the world enter into the mind.

Excerpts from:

The Critique of Erroneous Doctrines: Chapter 2 An Analysis of the Brahma Sutra by Swami Krishnananda
Archives - Blog

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org

(Nov 9,2013 ) Spiritual Message for the Day – The Total Picture of Creation by Swami Krishnananda

The Total Picture of Creation

Divine Life Society Publication: Chapter 4  A Study of the Bhagavadgita by Swami Krishnananda

Sankhya is the knowledge of the placement of a person in this universe. Work, activity and any motion for that purpose – is guided by the circumstances prevailing at that given moment of time.

Now, your location in this universe can be known only by a study of the whole process of creation. Doctrines of creation are adumbrated in schools of thought such as the Sankhya and the Vedanta. In the context of the discussion of the nature of consciousness, I mentioned to you  that the primary principle is the pure ‘I-amness’, Pure Consciousness adapting and adjusting itself to its own Self, as it were. The Sankhya calls this indivisible absolute consciousness Purusha. You may call it by any other name – God, if you like, the Supreme Absolute. It is absolute because it is not related to anything outside. It is a non-related, indivisible omnipresence, conscious of itself alone, and there is no consciousness of anything else. ‘I am what I am’ – aham asmi. This is the consciousness of the Supreme Purusha.

The process of creation is supposed to start with the emergence of the activity of Prakriti, which is the cosmic impulsion of this Universal Consciousness to delimit itself in a certain fashion for the projection of this cosmos. This Prakriti, this cosmic impulsive objectivity, is made up of three forces called sattva, rajas and tamas – dynamis, statis and equilibration. Prakriti, so-called, is compared to a rope with strands. The rope is not different from the strands. You cannot say the strands are the qualities or the properties of the rope. The threefold operation of sattva, rajas, tamas is itself Prakriti.

Purusha consciousness is universal awareness minus activity or motion, and Prakriti is only motion or activity minus consciousness of Universality. So how can these two, inactive consciousness and active unconsciousness, be clubbed together?

The analogy of the Sankhya philosophy describes two persons, one who is blind but can walk, and another who is lame but can see. These two people join together because they both want to move in the same direction.  The lame person who sits on the shoulders of the blind walking person can see, and directs him where to go, and so it is a very good understanding between them. Universal Consciousness, which is inactive, operates in conjunction with the activity of Prakriti, which is unconscious. When these two processes are blended together and Purusha and Prakriti jointly act, what happens first is that Prakriti, in its sattva aspect, reflects the Universal Consciousness within itself, as light can be reflected in a glass. The glass here, which is sattva, is not perfectly clean where the light passes unaffected and undisturbed, but there is a little disturbance and the consciousness, which is universal Purusha, gets delimited to some extent, though in a very insignificant manner.

As space is a part of Prakriti, then Purusha, which is independent of Prakriti, cannot be said to be all-pervading in a strictly logical sense. It is just Being-as-such, Pure I-am, and cannot be called all-pervading. But it appears to be all-pervading on account of its reflection in the sattva guna of Prakriti, which also has other qualities – rajas and tamas. After Purusha there is Prakriti, and after Prakriti there is Mahat. Mahat is the third principle – Cosmic-consciousness, the Pure I-am, Be-ness-as-such. The Absolute Existence becomes conscious as all-pervading, omnipresent. This Mahat, or the Great Being Mahat-tattva, is omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent. This is the God of the universe, you may say if you like.

Pure God, by Himself, creates nothing. He is just All-in-All. Creativity is attributed to God on account of His so-called reflection in the sattva omnipresence of Prakriti, and God becomes Mahat-tattva, also known as Hiranyagarbha in Vedanta terminology. Mahat may be said to be Hiranyagarbha, the all-knowing creative principle, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent consciousness. When omnipresence becomes conscious of itself – I-am, omnipresent – it becomes cosmic Ahamkara. So first is Purusha, second is Prakriti, third is Mahat, fourth is Ahamkara. Ahamkara here is to be understood as Cosmic Self-awareness – the whole universe becoming conscious: ‘I am.’ It is not merely omnipresence as such; it is consciousness of one’s being omnipresent.

In the state of Ahamkara, Cosmic I-amness, or consciousness of one’s being omnipresent, a threefold activity is supposed to take place: the threefold division of the supreme Self-consciousness into the subjective perceiver adhyatma, the objective universe adhibhuta, and a third connecting link adhideva.

The adhibhuta prapancha, or the universe of material existence, we may say, is originally a space-time vibration complex. Space, time and motion – this is the beginning of creation. Space means a sudden vacuum, as it were, created before the omnipresence. In order that you may become something other than what you are, you have to cease to be what you are at present. If God has to become the object, He has to cease to be the subject. Now, He cannot cease to be the subject as He is the Pure Subject, so a sudden vacuous condition is created, as perhaps is done by a juggler who creates an illusion. Suddenly a thing which is not there will be projected before you. Your consciousness is interfered with by the juggler’s magic or his slight-of-hand. Immediately he creates a vacuous condition of your mind by his action so that you forget what you saw and you begin to see what is not there. God is sometimes called Mahamaya, which means the Great Juggler who can project a thing which is not there. God created the heaven and the Earth, says the Bible. Out of what substance did He create them? If there is nothing outside God, out of what substance did He create it?

You will find later on, by a deep analysis of the process of creation, that creation is a vacuous projection. It has no substance by itself because substance is God only, and if the universe also had a substance independently, there would be a conflict between the two substances.  

God seems to be creating a vacuous situation to create a universe that is also basically a vacuum. Hence, there is non-substantiality in the whole universe. Everyone, everything, including you and I, are basically vacuous. There is no substance in us. The substance is only a jugglery. It is a mix-up of space-time and certain elements. Thus, creation might have taken place, or creation might not have taken place. You may say the juggler has really created something because you can see it, and therefore God has created the world because you are seeing it. But the juggler has created nothing; he has only put you under the pressure of an influence. In the same way, God has created no world, but somehow or other some illusion has caught hold of you – this consciousness. You do not know how you are seeing what the juggler is doing, though he has done nothing. In the same way, God has done something like the greatest juggler, and you are seeing a world which is really not there. Finally you will see, if the curtain is lifted, God alone is permeating the whole thing (world). That is what you will realize afterwards.

So the objective universe, which is adhibhuta, starts with space, time and vibration. This vibration is fivefold in its nature. In Sanskrit, these five aspects of vibration are called shabda, which means the potential of sound, sparsha, the potential of touch, rupa, the potential of sight, rasa, the potential of taste, and gandha, the potential of smell. The whole universe of perception is constituted of these fivefold forces. What do you see in this world? What do you mean by ‘the world’? What is called ‘world’ is nothing but what you hear, touch, see, taste, and smell. Suppose you do not see anything, and you cannot touch or smell or taste; the world vanishes for you. So the world is nothing but a bundle of sensations; it looks like that.

Afterwards, these forces congeal into solidity in a particular permutation and combination process. These congealed forms of the five forces shabda, sparsha, rupa, rasa, gandha become space – or sky, as it is called – and air, fire, water, earth. In Sanskrit, sky or space is called akasha, air is vayu, agni is fire, apas is water, pritvi is earth. So this world of the physical elements of earth, water, fire, air, ether, space and sky – this world which you value so much, on which you are seated, which is attracting you and repelling you at the same time – is just the last concretization of these forces shabda, sparsha, rupa, rasa, gandha which are the vibrations of space and time, which is one aspect of this cosmic omnipresence, Ahamkara. Thus, the objective side has been explained.

Excerpts from:

The Picture of Creation - Chapter 4  A Study of the Bhagavadgita by Swami Krishnananda

Archives - Blog

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org

(Oct 13,2013) Spiritual Message for the Day –The Triad of Adhyatma, Adhibhuta and Adhidaiva

The Triad of Adhyatma, Adhibhuta and Adhidaiva

Divine Life Society Publication: Chapter 2 – Yoga as a Universal Science by Swami Krishnananda

 

The whole of our experience in this universe is made up of two aspects, namely, Purusha and Prakriti, consciousness and matter, the seer and what is seen. The Yoga texts tell us that our experience, as constituted of the seer and the seen, is what can be called in Sanskrit Vyavaharika Satta. It means empirical experience. It is empirical, Vyavaharik or of practical utility, because, though it is workable and seems to be the only reality available to us, it is not the whole of reality. The aspect of the seer and the aspect of the seen, the consciousness aspect and the object aspect, the Purusha aspect and the Prakriti aspect, are often designated in the ancient texts as the Adhyatma and the Adhibhuta.

The Adhyatma is the inward perceiving, seeing consciousness; lodged with the individuality of the seer. The Adhibhuta is the universe of objects, or what appears as the material expanse before us.  And a third principle which may be called the Adhidaiva or the superintending Divinity, transcending the subject and the object, Purusha and Prakriti. Because, the connection between the seer and the seen cannot be explained merely by the two isolated realities, seer and the seen. Two demarcated principles cannot come in contact with each other and cannot know each other. The possibility of the perception or awareness of something as an object outside by the consciousness within can be accounted for only by the presence of something that is there as a connecting link between the subject and the object. This is invisible to the limited eyes. But, logical deduction requires or demands the presence of such a principle, without which it is not possible to explain how we are aware of the existence of the world.

How can anyone know that there is something outside, something that is totally cut off from the one that beholds that thing? That things are not entirely severed from the seer of the things implies again that there is a link between the seer and the seen, which is something transcending both the seer and the seen. So, beyond the Adhyatma and the Adhibhuta, there is the Adhidaiva. The one infinite Being or the Adhidaiva appears as the two, namely, Purusha and Prakriti, or the Adhyatma and the Adhibhuta, the subject and the object. But it remains yet as a unity.

There is no internal transformation of the Supreme Being into the world. If that had taken place really, there would be no possibility of the world returning to God, in the same way as there is no chance of curd returning to milk. Such a transformation has not taken place in God, and it cannot take place, inasmuch as the Supreme Being is indivisible, and indivisibility cannot undergo transformation of any kind. Thus, the unitary aspect of the Supreme Being is maintained in spite of its apparent division into the seer and the seen, the subject and the object. Thus, behind the diversity of experience, there is the unity of a transcendental principle which persists in spite of the multiplicity and the duality of existence. So, there is a tripartite creation, we may say, over and above the dual concept of creation.

On the one side we have the universe which is the Adhibhuta, on the other side there is the Adhyatma, the viewer, the beholder of the whole universe, and above these two, we have the connecting link, the transcendental. We may call it the Divinity, we may call it the Devata, we may call it God, we may call it the Angel or the Spirit of the Cosmos. Plato, for instance, speaks about there being a superintending archetype as he calls it, transcending the world of opinion, sensory perception and mental cognition. Two things cannot relate to each other, unless a third thing is there. This third thing was called by Plato as metaphysical principle. And, in Indian philosophical parlance, we generally designate this third principle as the Devata or the Divinity.

Generally, people think that in the religions of India there are many gods, resulting in a sort of polytheism. This is a thorough misconception of the philosophical foundation of India. There are not many gods. The many gods are the manifold levels through which the one Supreme Being manifests Itself by different densities of descent, becoming grosser and grosser, coming further and further down, for the purpose of maintaining the relationship between the subject and the object. As there are several levels of descent, it appears as if there are many gods, but they all are but different levels of the one supreme connecting Principle. Several levels of manifestation of one and the same thing cannot be regarded as many things; so, there are not many gods. This wrong idea of many gods should be brushed aside from the mind. There is only one God and this superintending Principle is the Adhi Devata, the very, very essential Reality without which no experience can be accounted for.

Continue to Read:

The Triad of  Adhyatma, Adhibhuta and Adhidaiva: Chapter 2 – Yoga as a Universal Science by Swami Krishnananda

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org

(Sep 24,2013) Spiritual Message for the Day – The Nature and Location of Consciousness

 

 

The Nature and Location of Consciousness

Divine Life Society Publication: The Nature and Location of Consciousness by Swami Krishnananda

What is consciousness? Where is it situated? What is its origin? How is it related to us? And what is its final importance?



Where is your consciousness? “It is inside me; it cannot be anywhere else.” When we say it is inside, what do we actually mean? Water is inside a bucket; fruits are inside a basket; we are all inside a room. Do we mean that consciousness is inside us in this sense? Then it would mean that consciousness is not the body, because we say it is inside the body. Or, are you prepared to say that it is the body itself? If you say that perhaps consciousness is not inside in the sense explained, that it is inseparable from the body, then inseparableness also involves a kind of relation.

When you think, you will agree that it is consciousness that is responsible for thinking. Who is thinking? Is it your body that is thinking, or is there something else that you think is thinking? What do you mean by “I am speaking”? Who are you?

There is a certain unavoidable relationship between body and consciousness, because the body, also, is conscious. Consciousness is perhaps an emanation from the bodily individuality, as fire emanates from a matchstick. This is the reason why no one can feel that oneself is a consciousness; there is always an insistent feeling that one is a body only. There is an intense fondness for the body. It is taken care of as identical with one's own self: It is me, and I cannot be different from what I appear to be.

If it is true that consciousness, for the purpose of our present argument, is accepted to be inside the body only, whatever be its relation to the body, then it cannot be outside the body. If the consciousness is only inside the body, there would be no means of knowing that there are things outside the body.

How do we know that there is an object outside us? Often, it is said that the objects, as they really are, are never known by us. The objects are known by us only as they appear to our mind or consciousness. This is to say that we have a descriptive knowledge of the behavior of objects, but we do not come directly in contact with the objects as they are in themselves.

The true nature of the object is supposed to be constituted of what are known as primary qualities. If only the secondary qualities are available for cognition to the sense organs, how do we know that things exist at all, except in the sense of a reaction produced by them in a representative manner, not as a direct contact with the object? There is no means, of really coming in contact with the essence of an object.

Only if an object is designated by a particular description called name, we can know what that object is. This is one point. The second point is, apart from the name or the verbal description of an object that is necessary in order that we may locate the object, there is also, in our mind, an idea of what the object is. We have an idea that a tree is tall. In a similar manner, we have a particular idea of every other thing in the world.

There is an object called a hard stone or granite. We take for granted that this granite is exactly as it appears to the sense organs. But, by investigation we can know that this hard, impenetrable object called granite is constituted of little particles. These particles can be divided further into more and more minute components until they become indistinguishable from the basic components of all things in the world. This essence, being the basic reality of the so-called varieties of things, makes us conclude that there is a unity at the back of the apprehended duality and multiplicity of objects.

The Samkhya calls this fundamental material essence of the objects as Prakriti. Then, who becomes conscious that there is a Prakriti?

The consciousness that apprehends this universal material essence is called Purusha, which should not be identified with man or a human essence. It is a metaphysical definition given to the consciousness which is supposed to know that there is a universally distributed material essence. Consciousness cannot be identified with matter because there is a total dissimilarity between consciousness and matter. Matter does not know itself. Consciousness knows itself. This is the distinction between objectivity and pure subjectivity. Purusha is infinite, all-pervading, and the Prakriti that is known by it also is all-pervading.

Samkhya philosophy explains that consciousness does not really come in contact with this material object, because they are dissimilar in nature. What happens is that the consciousness reflects within itself the presence of this ubiquitous material substance, as a crystal which is pure in itself, and has no color by itself, can reflect the color of an object such as a rose flower brought near it, and because of the proximity of this colored object, the whole crystal may also look red.

In this manner, the Samkhya explains that consciousness – wrongly, we must say – begins to associate itself with the objects in the world and the basic Prakriti, and creates a wondrous universal situation. That objectified consciousness, which has arisen on account of this reflection of the ubiquitous material substance on the all-pervading consciousness, is the ultimate metaphysical reality of the Samkhya, called Cosmic Being, which knows Itself as all-pervading.

The omnipresent Being should know that it is omnipresent; otherwise, it would be just Being-as-such. This is a particular descent from the original stage of pure omnipresence or omniscience, wherein there is a universal self-consciousness of the fact of being omnipresent. “I am” is the feeling of this omnipresent Being. It is not the “I” of myself or yourself. It is a universal omnipotence and omnipresence asserting Itself, “I am”. God cannot be described by any other way than “He is”; and God can regard Himself as “I am”. There is no other possible definition available to this great “I”, which includes every other conceivable little dot of “I's”, like ourselves.

The self-consciousness attributed to this otherwise all-pervading omnipresence suddenly manifests itself in a threefold form. That threefold form is known in Vedantic language as the objective reality called adhibhuta, the subjective reality called adhyatma, and the divine superintending connection between the subjective side and the objective side known as adhidaiva. The world appears to be external to the knowing consciousness, and the knowing consciousness places itself as a subjective knower of this world that is outside, and this connection between the subjective knower and the objective world cannot be established unless there is a link between the subjective side and the objective side.

This is the reason why you cannot know what is happening between you and the object when perception takes place. Some invisible operation which is consciousness by itself seems to be operating, because the link between the knowing subject and the object cannot but be conscious.

Excerpts from:

The Nature and Location of Consciousness by Swami Krishnananda

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org

(Aug 23,2013) Spiritual Message for the Day – Consciouness and Matter

Consciousness and Matter

Divine Life Society Publication: Discourse 37: Commentary on the Bhagavadgita by Swami Krishnananda

There is a belief among commentators of the Gita that the great Upanishadic statement tat tvam asi has something to do with the threefold classification of the chapters of the Gita. The individual is tvam – 'thou'. This 'thou', or individual, is taken up for an intensified form of study in the first six chapters. Tat means 'That' – the Supreme. The nature of 'That' is taken up for study in the next six chapters. Asi means 'art'; 'That thou art'. The unification of the 'thou' and the 'That', the methodology of attaining the unity between the individual and the Universal, in all its detail, is explained in the last six chapters.

Sri Krishna Himself starts speaking, without any question from Arjuna. Idam sariram kaunteya kshetram ity abhidiyate (13.1): "This body, this physical embodiment of the human being, is technically called kshetra or the field where some activity takes place. A field is an area where something happens.

While this body, which is physical in nature, is a field of operation, there must be somebody who carries on this operation in the field. The field is the body; but the knower of this body is the operator behind it. This body is, no doubt, the vehicle of action; but there is somebody who is conscious that there is a body which is to be used for the purpose of some activity. This body is an instrument of action in this world, but this body cannot act by itself. It is inert, constituted of the five inert elements – earth, water, fire, air and ether. Inert instruments cannot act by themselves. Even a car cannot move unless there is a driver. So is the case with this body. Unless there is prana and an intelligence that drives the prana in respect of the bodily limbs, there can be no activity.

So while this body may be called kshetra or field, the one who knows this field is conscious of it, and operates through it – lives in it, indwells it, and handles it in a different manner – such a principle is called kshetrajna. Jna means knower, and kshetra is, of course, field, so kshetrajna means 'the knower of the field'. Hence, this body is the kshetra, the field, and the one who knows this field is kshetrajna.

Consciousness and matter constitute the subject of this chapter. The so-called field – this body or anything that is material – is an unconscious presentation that is usually called matter. That which knows matter is consciousness. How do we connect consciousness with matter?

The knower of the field knows the field. Consciousness has no characteristic of matter, and matter does not have the characteristic of consciousness. Consciousness does not move, whereas matter is always in a state of flux and agitation. Therefore, they are dissimilar in their character. Objectivity is the character of the body and matter, whereas subjectivity is the nature of consciousness. They are totally opposed to each other. So how can that which is pure subject come in contact with that which is pure object? How would we solve this great issue of what the relationship between two terrible contraries is? They cannot have any kind of connection. Yet they seem to be working together in some way for the purpose of effecting some aim, which seems to be the very process of evolution.

"Arjuna, I am the knower of the field." The Lord says, "I am the Pure Consciousness that knows all things and operates these material forces; and I am not merely in one body. When I refer to the body, you may be thinking of some particular body – this body or that body – and there is a consciousness in each body. That may be so – that consciousness is inherently present in every body, within each person – but that is not the point. "I am present as the kshetrajna, or the knower of the field, in all the fields. That is, all individuals whatsoever – right from Brahma, the creator, down to the atom – are indwelt by Me, and I know all things as the Omniscient Knower."

In a sense, it means that the kshetra is the entire physical universe. The whole of creation can be considered as the kshetra or the field of action, and Omniscient Intelligence that is operating in terms of this material manifestation is kshetrajna. Therefore, the question of the relationship between God and creation, consciousness and matter, kshetrajna and kshetra, purusha and prakriti – all mean finally one and the same thing.

"This is real knowledge. I consider this to be supreme and real knowledge." What is that knowledge? It is the knowledge of kshetra and kshetrajna. If we can know the actual relationship between God and the world, soul and body, consciousness and matter, knower and the known – if this can be clear to us – we have known everything. This knowledge is the highest knowledge. 

Excerpts from:

Commentary on the Bhagavadgita by Swami Krishnananda

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org

(Aug 9,2013) Spiritual Message for the Day – The Mind as a Quantum of Energy

The Mind as a Quantum of Energy

Spoken to the students in the Yoga Vedanta Forest Academy on Sept 26,1996 by Swami Krishnananda

Our subject is the yoga of meditation, which has direct connection with what we call the mind, or the mind-stuff. The mind is neither inside the body, nor is it outside the body; it is just what we are.

The quantum of energy, capacity, and confidence that we have in our own selves is the mind operating. Our value is not in what we possess as an external commodity from the world, but is the manner we are thinking in our mind. It is said that we are what we think we are.

What do we think we are? What is the opinion that we have about our own selves? The answer would be a bundle of chaos. Our idea of our own selves is nothing but confusion. It is so because every moment of time we change the idea about our own selves. Often, we think that we are well off; often, we think that we are miserable. Many a time we think that we have everything that we need; and often we think that we do not have what we actually want.

You must have noticed that even when a person is, for all practical purposes, confident that he or she has everything that one needs, still, there will be a persistent lingering thought that something more is there, beyond what one has already, and it is not under one’s possession.

The mind is a quantum of energy that is operating in us. The mind is energy. It is not a thing; it is not an object. It is just what energy can be defined as. Our power is in our mind. As strong as our mind is, so strong we ourselves also are. If, for any reason whatsoever, the mind is not strong, and it feels that it is incomplete in some way in comparison with somebody else, then the strength diminishes.

The wrong notion that the quantum of energy called the mind is only inside the body is the cause of our difficulty. We know very well that energy cannot be bottled up in any particular place. It is a pervasive reality, which gives meaning and value to everything in the world. This energy is present in everything in the world. Animate, inanimate, or whatever it is, everything is a concentrated form of energy.

Accepting the fact that the mind is the knowing principle, and it is not outside the individuality of a person, it becomes difficult to explain how such a mind, which is so limited and is finite, can become conscious of the existence of anything else at all. A mysterious operation takes place, due to which we are aware that the world exists, and there are many things around us. This is a subject, not merely of general psychology, but of what we may call philosophy.

That thing which does not require any external demonstration is our own consciousness. We need not have to prove that we are conscious, because we never doubt that we are conscious. Always we are conscious of something. Sometimes the mind and consciousness are considered as identical for certain practical purposes, though in fact the mind and consciousness are not identical with each other.

Briefly, we may say that the mind is the operational phenomenon projected by consciousness. Consciousness does not operate in any particular direction. The reason is that it cannot be confined to any particular place. The consciousness of being in one particular spot precludes the consciousness of there being anything at all outside that particular spot.

Every assertion of consciousness is involved in subjectivity and objectivity, as they are called. There is a subjective side of consciousness, which makes one feel that it is the knower of a particular individual or a thing. But there is an objective side of it, namely, that it cannot know that it is subjective, unless it is also objective. The subject and the object are not two different items, but complementary to each other. The consciousness of knowing implies the necessary counterpart of there being something which is to be known.

What makes you feel that you are a whole by yourself is the waking consciousness; you may call it the waking mind which is a composite inclusiveness of your total personality. When your waking mind goes into a state of dream, this so-called waking consciousness splits itself into the knower and the known aspect of the dream world.

The transcendent aspect of the waking mind is retained intact, in spite of its apparent descent into a division of the dream subject and the dream object. You appear to have become somebody else in the dream, but really you are the same person that you were even before going into the dream. This is the reason why you wake up from the dream healthily, and without feeling that you have become somebody else.

It appears that King Janaka once dreamed that he was a butterfly, and this dream continued all whole night. When he woke up, people greeted him: “Janaka Maharaj, namaskar.” He asked the courtiers, “Am I Janaka, or a butterfly? Is it Janaka, the king, dreaming that he is a butterfly, or is the butterfly dreaming that he is a king?”

The Samkhya concludes that there are only two realities ultimately – consciousness and matter. That which knows is consciousness, and that which is known is called matter. The known-ness of matter arises on account of the fact that matter cannot know itself. The materialist argument that only matter exists is defeated in one moment by the consequence that follows from this argument that matter cannot know itself. If matter only exists, according to the materialist doctrine, who will know that there is matter at all? Matter is that thing which is bereft of consciousness. Therefore, matter cannot know that it exists. Hence, who is saying that the matter exists at all? That one which is affirming that there is such a thing called matter cannot itself be matter. Hence, there must be two realities at least – namely, consciousness, and that which is known by consciousness.

The Sanskrit terminological description of these two principles is purusha and prakriti. Purusha is the conscious, living principle; prakriti is the matter that is what is called the whole universe. That which cannot know its own existence, and yet operates, is matter; and that which knows itself is consciousness.

We are not the physical body; we are consciousness, and that consciousness is unlimited.  It is infinite in its nature, and as you yourself are the consciousness, you are, at the root of your being, an unlimited potentiality. The possession of the whole Earth cannot satisfy us because, in fact, there is no such thing called possession, because one thing cannot become another thing. That which is not us cannot become us.

Having established the fact that consciousness is everywhere, it cannot be considered as an active principle, because activity is a movement of something outside itself. The externality of a phenomenon is necessary in order that activity is possible. If there is nothing outside us, we cannot act. But having concluded that consciousness is everywhere, and it is infinite in its nature, the Samkhya has to conclude, at the same time, that consciousness is inactive, while prakriti is active. The inactivity of the illumination of consciousness, combined with the activity of matter, which does not know itself, is the whole drama of life. It is an admixture of the inactive infinite consciousness, and the active unconscious material principle.

Things to ponder: “How is it possible that consciousness can be associated with matter in any way whatsoever? How could consciousness know that there is matter, because they are two different things, qualitatively? If consciousness is infinite, it is everywhere. If it is everywhere, where does matter exist? Where is the place for matter to exist at all, because you have already filled the whole space with consciousness? Does matter exist at all?”

Excerpts from:

The Mind as a Quantum of Energy by Swami Krishnananda
 

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org

(Apr18, 2013) The Spiritual Reality – a Paradox for Psychology

The Spiritual Reality – a Paradox for Psychology

From Divine Life Society Publication “The Yoga System” by Swami Krishnananda

The human being seems to be passing from waking state to others, such as dream and deep sleep. Though we have some sort of awareness in dream, it is strange that in deep sleep we do not know even our own selves, and yet we know that we do exist then, without doing anything, even without thinking. The condition of deep sleep is a paradox for psychology and is the crux of the yoga analysis. In deep sleep, we have consciousness not associated with objects, and hence we remain oblivious of everything external. There is, at the same time, unconsciousness of even one's own existence due to there being the potentiality for objective perception. The result is, however, that the deepest in the individual is consciousness, which is called by such names as the Atman, Purusha, etc. This is the real Self.

In the cosmos, there are five gross elements and within them are five forces which manifest the elements. These forces are the universal causes of everything that is physical, and are called tanmatras, a term which signifies the essence of objects. There is such a force or power behind the elements of Ether, Air, Fire, Water and Earth. Sabda or sound is the force behind Ether. But this sound is, different from what we merely hear with our ears. It is the subtle principle behind the whole of Ether, on account of which the ears are capable of hearing at all. This is sound as tanmatra. Likewise, there are the tanmatras of Air, Fire, Water and Earth, called respectively sparsa or touch, rupa or form, rasa or taste and gandha or smell. These powers are subtle energies immanent in the elements constituting the physical universe.

Modern science through research proved that even the atoms are formed of certain substances, which have the character of both waves of energy and particles of force. There is nothing but force, a continuum of energy, everywhere in the universe. The tanmatras of the yoga system, however, are subtler than the energy of the scientist, even as the prana is subtler than electricity.

Just as behind the prana there is the mind, behind the tanmatras there is the Cosmic Mind. Beyond the Cosmic Mind are the Cosmic Ego, the Cosmic Intellect, and finally prakriti, in which the whole universe exists as a tree in a seed, or as effect in its cause. Transcending prakriti is the Absolute-Consciousness, called Brahman. So, whether we dive deep within ourselves or within the cosmos, we find the same thing - Consciousness.  And the stages of manifestation in the individual correspond to those in the universe.

The purpose of yoga is to effect a communion between the individual and cosmic structures and to realize the ultimate Reality. The yoga places before us the goal of a union wherein infinity and eternity seem to come together. The aim of yoga is to raise the status of the individual to the cosmic level and to abolish the false difference between the individual and the cosmic. The individual is not separate from the cosmic, but there seems to be some confusion in the mind of the individual which has caused an artificial isolation of itself from the rest of the universe. This confusion is called ajnana or avidya, which really means an absence or negation of true knowledge. Here we enter the realms of depth psychology.

Continue to read:

“The Spiritual Reality – a Paradox for Psychology” by Swami Krishnananda

“Essence of Divine Life” by Swami Sivananda

“Self- Realization” answers by Swami Chidananda

If you would like to purchase the print edition, visit:
http://www.dlshq.org/cgi-bin/store/commerce.cgi?keywords=es53

If you would like to contribute to the dissemination of spiritual knowledge please contact the General Secretary at:

generalsecretary@sivanandaonline.org