Next verse, ācārya shows how to separate ātmā and anātmā as thought association. From verse 16 to verse 29 tvam-padārtha-vicara - analysis the real meaning of I is done.
vapustuṣādibhiḥ kośairyuktam yuktyavaghātataḥ |
ātmānamantaram śudham vivicyāttaṇḍulam yathā || 16 ||
Ātmā is inner and pure, but appears endowed with five covers. One should separate ātmā from gross body etc. by pounding analysis, just like separating the rice grains from the husks.
Here the example of paddy is given, while the rice grain - taṇḍula is covered with husk - tuṣā. They need to be separated by pounding the rice to be ready for use. yathā - just like vivicyāttaṇḍulam - one should separate the rice grains from the husks. Similarly ātmānamantaram - ātmā which is inner and śudham - and pure, appears to be kośairyuktam - endowed with five covers should be separated vapustuṣādibhiḥ - from the body etc. which is compared to husk. But the separation between ātma and five covers is to be done cognitively by the pounding of analysis / reasoning - yuktyavaghātataḥ.
There is one reasoning given in the text pancadasi, called anvaya-vyatireka-nyaya - continuity and discontinuity reasoning. We all experience waking, dreaming and deep sleep. Cognition of myself pretty much identifies with this physical body in the waking state. When I am in the dream state, my gross body is no longer evident, but ātmā me still evident as the subtle mind. This is continuity - anvaya of ātmā, and vyatireka - discontinuity of the gross body. In the deep sleep state, my mind is not evident, but I ātmā is still evident, therefore upon waking up, I know that I slept well. From this analysis we know this body-mind-sense-complex is subject to coming and going, whereas ātmā is invariable/inherent. Therefore the variable body-mind-sense-complex is different from invariable ātmā - self. They are just upādhi which transfer the qualities to upāhita ātmā as though. Therefore we are ascertained that upādhi is not me, through pounding analysis in our daily life.
The word antaram - inner is to be understood properly, since it may cause the thinking that the self is located deep inside this body-mind-sense. Since our journey of analysis is started from this body which was considered to be ātmā, one cover is being dismissed by another. At last, we arrived at the self which is un-negate-able, which is seen as the innermost compared to all covers. And all pervasive consciousness which remains un-negate-able as ātmā is called sarvantara-ātmā - the self of all. Since it is the self of all, ātmā is said to be sarvagata in the next verse.
sadā sarvagato’ pyātmā na sarvatrāvabhāsate |
budhāvevāvabhāseta svaccheṣu pratibimbavat || 17 ||
Even though ātmā always exists everywhere, it doesn’t manifest everywhere. It would only manifest in buddhi, just like reflection on a pure surface.
Ātmā is sarvagataḥ - all pervading, which means it is the very content of all. Just like clay is pervading the pot, it is the very content of the pot. There is not a tiny part of the pot which is not clay, and there is no pot when the clay is not. Unlike paint which is covering the surface of the pot. Therefore frankly speaking, ātmā can’t be inside in the physical sense, it pervades all anātmā.
If this is so, when ātmā is of the nature of consciousness, how come we don’t feel consciousness in the insentient things, or in the dead body? Because of cid-ābhasa - reflected consciousness (in the form of sūkṣmaśarīra - subtle body) does not manifest in insentient things. sadā sarvagato’ pyātmā - even though ātmā always exists everywhere, na sarvatrāvabhāsate - it doesn’t manifest everywhere. budhāvevāvabhāseta - it would manifest in buddhi alone. For ātmā to shine, it required a particular medium which is buddhi - intellect, then ātmā can be recognised as aham - I.
svacchesu pratibimbavat - just like reflection on pure surfaces, even though sunlight is everywhere, when it falls on the mirror, the light is reflected, but if it falls on the dark wall, the light is not reflected.
Since ātmā presents in all, but I am reflected in the buddhi alone as the witness of all activities of the body etc., therefore as witness, I am different from them. This idea is presented in the next verse.
dehendriyamanobuddhiprakṛtibhyo vilakṣaṇam |
tadvṛttisākṣiṇam vidyādātmānam rājavatsadā || 18 ||
One should know the self to be different from body, sense organs, mind, intellect, māyā, and it also the witness of functions of those five covers.
vidyād - one should know ātmānaṃ - self to be vilakṣaṇam - different from dehendriyamanobuddhiprakṛtibhyo - body (annamaya-kośa), sense organs (prāṇamaya-kośa), mind (manomaya-kośa), intellect (vijñānamaya-kośa), māyā (kāraṇa-sharira/ānandamaya-kośa). And also should know the self is sadā - always the witness of the function of the those five cover - tadvṛttisākṣiṇaṃ. Popularly the word vṛtti is used for the meaning of thought, where the thought is the product of the function of the mind, therefore thought is called vṛtti. But vṛtti also means function, here in this verse vṛtti means function like walking, breathing, thinking, happy, etc. Just like the king rājavat, always witness all the works of his subjects without being involved.
If I am only the witness of the function of this body-mind-sense, why do I experience that I am the one who is doing all the activities?
vyāpṛteṣvindriyeṣvātmā vyāpārīvāvivekinām |
dṛśyate’ bhreṣu dhāvatsu dhāvanniva yathā śaśī || 19 ||
For non discriminative people, ātmā is concluded as the one who is active when the sense organs are active. Just like the moon is seen as though moving when clouds are moving.
yathā - just like śasī the moon dṛśyate - is seen dhāvanniva - as though moving (in opposite directions) abhreṣu - when the clouds dhāvatsu - are moving. Similarly vyāpṛteṣvindriyeṣu - when the organs are active, ātmā - the self vyāpārīva - is concluded as the one who is active avivekinām - for non-discriminative people (who doesn’t have guidance of guru and śāstra, who doesn’t know the different of ātmā and anātmā). Activities of sense organs are superimposed upon ātmā, therefore I experience as the doer of the activities.
In Gītā chapter 3 verse 28 says that the knower of the truth knows the guṇa (product of māyā) is different from the self, and karma (activity and its result) does not belong to the self. All the activities are only interaction between guṇa and guṇa, by knowing this, one doesn’t get entangled.
Comments