By Shri Lakshminarayan Aithal
(Shri Lakshminarayan Aithal has served for over 3 decades in Swami’s institution and is the former Principal of the Sri Sathya Sai Loka Seva Institutions at Muddenahalli. Inspired by Swami’s direct message to study the Upanishads, he first learnt Sanskrit and then studied the direct works of Adi Shankaracharya and Swami. Sincere perseverance led him to the reality of Aham Brahmasmi and He realized and experienced Swami’s words: “I am God and so are you”. He shares the import of the Upanishadic teachings with us in this series of articles.)
(From the previous edition, we began a new series of articles in this section entitled Vedanta Praveshika: an Entrance to Vedanta. This is a guided discussion on the essence of Vedanta which shows us how to deliberate and reach the conclusion that we are actually Premaswaroopas and not the mind-body-intellect complex.)
1. I am not the body; nor organs of sense; nor the mind; nor the egotism; nor the group of vital airs; and nor the intellect. I am away from wife, children, field and money. I am the eternal witness, the inner Self, the Auspicious One alone.
EXPLANATION
Here, people identify themselves with non-self-objects; and such objects are rejected one by one.
I AM NEITHER BODY, NOR THE ORGANS OF SENSE
Some people identify themselves either with the body or the organs of sense. External objects like stone, mud, etc. Don’t have life. The objects like stone, etc. do not move by themselves; and these objects don’t have marks of life like exhaling, inhaling, blood circulation, etc. These inert objects don’t see, nor do they listen. Hence, there is a difference between inert objects like stone, mud, wood, etc; and sentient ourselves. We are moving-living beings; and those inert objects are un-moving cold bodies. Thus, many people think. Some other people deliberate further: Stone, mud, etc. are lifeless objects; and we are living bodies; and lifeless objects are subjected to a few changes and they take a form of a living body and organs of sense. Therefore, scientifically body, organs of sense and external objects are essentially alike. Still, we have the power of knowing the external objects and the power of using those objects for our purpose. That is why, we denote the external objects as ‘ this’ or ‘ that ‘; and we identify with ourselves with the body and the organs of sense. This is the opinion of the second group of people.
But these two opinions are not correct. If I am the group of body and organs of sense; I-feeling should not appear in each limb of the body and the very same feeling should not appear in each of the organ of sense. But this I-feeling is experienced in each and every organ of body like-I walk, I touch, I smell, I see, etc.
Another explanation: A body has many limbs; there are also many organs of sense. If each and every organ is I; why don’t we have the feelings of multiple I’s or we-feeling? But the I-feeling is singular. This singular I-feeling is strongly rooted in us. Why is that so?
There is another obstacle to have the I-feeling in the parts of the body or in the organs of sense. The obstacle is this: Many changes come to body and organs of sense. If we are body, etc; we should have had the experience that these changes occurred in me alone. But the experience is not so. ‘ Dimness has come to my eyes’, ‘ My leg is lame; I am a lame man’- we often tell like this. If we were eyes and legs, when we say, ‘ My eye ‘ , it should be a meaningless sentence like: ‘My I ‘. In this connection, we can have another experience: We push external objects using our hands and legs. Easily, we can understand that these objects are different from us. Similarly, any part of the body can be cut and separated. Then, we don’t feel that we have separated ourselves. Suppose, a doctor cuts an useless limb, we don’t get the I-feeling in that removed part. Similarly, often we remove mucus, filth of the eye, saliva, sweat, hair, nail etc. From the body. We never get I-feeling in those removed parts, rather we feel disgusted. Similarly, we can determine in the case of organs of sense. We know the different organs of sense separately as, ‘ my eye ‘, my ear’, ‘ my nose ‘. If we deliberate further, eye, ear, nose- are not only organs, they function in these spots. As eye, ear, nose etc. are holes of organs; these organs and their functions like seeing, smelling- are separated from us. Not only that, if the sharpness of the organs like eye, ear, nose etc. are decreased or lost, we don’t believe that such changes occurred in us or we have changed ourselves. Therefore, it is established that the organs of sense are not the I-object within us.
In that manner, what is the conclusion? Body and organs of sense are many, and I am alone; and body and organs of sense obtain different changes, and then also I remain changeless. These body and organs of sense are known and I am the knower. Therefore, body and organs of sense are inert-objects similar to material objects like stone, mud, wood etc. I am not any one of them; I am a conscious object that knows them.
There may arise a doubt: If body and organs of sense are not conscious and if they are inert-objects like stone, mud, etc; what is to be told about the marks of consciousness seen in the body and organs of sense? The marks of consciousness like knowing objects, taking them, going away from them, etc. are seen in body and organs of sense; and these marks of consciousness are not found in inert objects like stone, mud, etc; whence these marks have come in body and organs of sense?
The relief for the doubt can be given thus: Actually, there are no marks of consciousness in the body and organs of sense. A railway engine runs, a magnet attracts a piece of iron, a magnifying glass magnifies subtle objects; and by these marks none can tell that these are conscious objects. The movements and strength of body and organs of sense are not by themselves; and these are used by conscious entities. The body and organs belong to us, and we use them. Therefore, we are conscious beings; and body and organs of sense are inert objects. It is wrong to consider that organs of sense have consciousness. For, we know the organs of sense and these organs are objects that are known. As we see subtle objects through a magnifying glass, we know the external objects through the means of organs of sense. Therefore, the organs of sense are inert objects, they are instruments and we are conscious beings and we know through these instruments.
Thus, it is concluded that I-object in us is not either the body or any organ of sense. Mainly, the known body and organs of sense are not the knowing-I; and this argument is strengthened. This deliberation on how we are not mind, intellect or ego will be continued in the next few editions of Venugaanam
(Shri Lakshminarayan Aithal has served for over 3 decades in Swami’s institution and is the former Principal of the Sri Sathya Sai Loka Seva Institutions at Muddenahalli. Inspired by Swami’s direct message to study the Upanishads, he first learnt Sanskrit and then studied the direct works of Adi Shankaracharya and Swami. Sincere perseverance led him to the reality of Aham Brahmasmi and He realized and experienced Swami’s words: “I am God and so are you”. He shares the import of the Upanishadic teachings with us in this series of articles.)
(From the previous edition, we began a new series of articles in this section entitled Vedanta Praveshika: an Entrance to Vedanta. This is a guided discussion on the essence of Vedanta which shows us how to deliberate and reach the conclusion that we are actually Premaswaroopas and not the mind-body-intellect complex.)
1. I am not the body; nor organs of sense; nor the mind; nor the egotism; nor the group of vital airs; and nor the intellect. I am away from wife, children, field and money. I am the eternal witness, the inner Self, the Auspicious One alone.
EXPLANATION
Here, people identify themselves with non-self-objects; and such objects are rejected one by one.
I AM NEITHER BODY, NOR THE ORGANS OF SENSE
Some people identify themselves either with the body or the organs of sense. External objects like stone, mud, etc. Don’t have life. The objects like stone, etc. do not move by themselves; and these objects don’t have marks of life like exhaling, inhaling, blood circulation, etc. These inert objects don’t see, nor do they listen. Hence, there is a difference between inert objects like stone, mud, wood, etc; and sentient ourselves. We are moving-living beings; and those inert objects are un-moving cold bodies. Thus, many people think. Some other people deliberate further: Stone, mud, etc. are lifeless objects; and we are living bodies; and lifeless objects are subjected to a few changes and they take a form of a living body and organs of sense. Therefore, scientifically body, organs of sense and external objects are essentially alike. Still, we have the power of knowing the external objects and the power of using those objects for our purpose. That is why, we denote the external objects as ‘ this’ or ‘ that ‘; and we identify with ourselves with the body and the organs of sense. This is the opinion of the second group of people.
But these two opinions are not correct. If I am the group of body and organs of sense; I-feeling should not appear in each limb of the body and the very same feeling should not appear in each of the organ of sense. But this I-feeling is experienced in each and every organ of body like-I walk, I touch, I smell, I see, etc.
Another explanation: A body has many limbs; there are also many organs of sense. If each and every organ is I; why don’t we have the feelings of multiple I’s or we-feeling? But the I-feeling is singular. This singular I-feeling is strongly rooted in us. Why is that so?
There is another obstacle to have the I-feeling in the parts of the body or in the organs of sense. The obstacle is this: Many changes come to body and organs of sense. If we are body, etc; we should have had the experience that these changes occurred in me alone. But the experience is not so. ‘ Dimness has come to my eyes’, ‘ My leg is lame; I am a lame man’- we often tell like this. If we were eyes and legs, when we say, ‘ My eye ‘ , it should be a meaningless sentence like: ‘My I ‘. In this connection, we can have another experience: We push external objects using our hands and legs. Easily, we can understand that these objects are different from us. Similarly, any part of the body can be cut and separated. Then, we don’t feel that we have separated ourselves. Suppose, a doctor cuts an useless limb, we don’t get the I-feeling in that removed part. Similarly, often we remove mucus, filth of the eye, saliva, sweat, hair, nail etc. From the body. We never get I-feeling in those removed parts, rather we feel disgusted. Similarly, we can determine in the case of organs of sense. We know the different organs of sense separately as, ‘ my eye ‘, my ear’, ‘ my nose ‘. If we deliberate further, eye, ear, nose- are not only organs, they function in these spots. As eye, ear, nose etc. are holes of organs; these organs and their functions like seeing, smelling- are separated from us. Not only that, if the sharpness of the organs like eye, ear, nose etc. are decreased or lost, we don’t believe that such changes occurred in us or we have changed ourselves. Therefore, it is established that the organs of sense are not the I-object within us.
In that manner, what is the conclusion? Body and organs of sense are many, and I am alone; and body and organs of sense obtain different changes, and then also I remain changeless. These body and organs of sense are known and I am the knower. Therefore, body and organs of sense are inert-objects similar to material objects like stone, mud, wood etc. I am not any one of them; I am a conscious object that knows them.
There may arise a doubt: If body and organs of sense are not conscious and if they are inert-objects like stone, mud, etc; what is to be told about the marks of consciousness seen in the body and organs of sense? The marks of consciousness like knowing objects, taking them, going away from them, etc. are seen in body and organs of sense; and these marks of consciousness are not found in inert objects like stone, mud, etc; whence these marks have come in body and organs of sense?
The relief for the doubt can be given thus: Actually, there are no marks of consciousness in the body and organs of sense. A railway engine runs, a magnet attracts a piece of iron, a magnifying glass magnifies subtle objects; and by these marks none can tell that these are conscious objects. The movements and strength of body and organs of sense are not by themselves; and these are used by conscious entities. The body and organs belong to us, and we use them. Therefore, we are conscious beings; and body and organs of sense are inert objects. It is wrong to consider that organs of sense have consciousness. For, we know the organs of sense and these organs are objects that are known. As we see subtle objects through a magnifying glass, we know the external objects through the means of organs of sense. Therefore, the organs of sense are inert objects, they are instruments and we are conscious beings and we know through these instruments.
Thus, it is concluded that I-object in us is not either the body or any organ of sense. Mainly, the known body and organs of sense are not the knowing-I; and this argument is strengthened. This deliberation on how we are not mind, intellect or ego will be continued in the next few editions of Venugaanam
No comments:
Post a Comment