Advaita for the Novice - Who is the doer-experiencer? - 2

Namaste all.

 

Series on Advaita for the Novice

 

"I am neither the Doer nor the Experiencer" - 2

 

(For No.1 go to post #35050)

 

Two 'Selves'

 

[A reference, say, to Ch.2, Shloka 7 of the Bhagavad-Gita would simply be

given as

"(2 - 7)" without mentioning the Bhagavad-Gita]

 

 

According to Vedanta, the doer/experiencer is the one who has identified

with one's body, mind, intellect (BMI). If you don't identify yourself with

your BMI, you are not the doer/experiencer. But who is this 'you' that is

being talked about? That is the clinching issue.

 

There is a triple personality that we should know of in order to know

ourselves. (Note that I am following here the last five shlokas of the

fifteenth chapter of the Gita and the explanations given in Panchadashi. I

should also acknowledge the influence of Aurobindo's Essays on the Gita and

of my father's lectures and writings in what I write below).

 

The first is the outer personality, by which I mean, not the external

personality that others see in us, but the personality that we claim in our

heart of hearts as "I". This outer personality of mine includes my BMI,

along with all the innermost thoughts that I know are mine, and therefore my

ego also.

 

[important note to scholars. By the 'outer personality' I am linking

together the 'concrete body' (sthula-sharIra) and the 'subtle body'

(sUkShma-sharIra) - purely for the purpose of clarity of this series of

articles.]

 

But behind the body-mind-intellect (BMI) there exists something which gives

it life. Without this, the BMI cannot express itself. We call this the

'JIva'. The corresponding English word 'soul' may be used most often though

it may not have all the connotations that 'JIva' has. "What dies when

separated from the soul is the body; the soul does not die" (Ch. U. VI - 11

-3). This soul is nothing but the spark of the Absolute Consciousness (7-5;

15-7) and therefore it is sentient. The Lord of the Gita introduces this

in the seventh chapter and says: His own divine Energy - called Cosmic

Nature (Sanskrit: PrakRti) - is two-fold. One is superior and the other is

not so superior. This latter is the source of all matter. It manifests

actually as eight-fold matter, namely, the five elements, plus mind, plus

intellect, plus ego.

 

In its manifestation as the five elements PrakRti constitutes all of what

science has unfolded about the universe and all of what it continues to

unfold. In the manifestation in each individual as one's

mind-intellect-ego, PrakRti constitutes all "the actions of one's past

lives individualised and earmarked for this life together with the

accumulated tendencies from all one's past lives" (Shankara's Commentary on

(3 - 33)).

 

The Superior prakRti (Sanskrit: parA-prakRti) is what becomes all the souls.

Each soul takes several bodies (physical appearances) one after the other

just as the same individual dons different clothes. ( 2 - 22).

 

In all these different appearances of the same soul, though it takes

different bodies, the same mind sticks on to it. (15 - 7, 8). But the

memories of the mind do not go with it since they stay in the brain and

perish along with it. However, in each such life of the particular soul,

the mind accumulates tendencies ('vAsanAs') that go on with it into

succeeding lives where it gets other bodies. It is these tendencies that

give a character to the mind. This character is a mixture of the three basic

strands of prakRti - the divine (satva), the dynamic (rajas) and the dull

(tamas).

 

Without BMI the soul cannot express itself as an individual. Without the

sentient soul, mind is just inert matter. But when it sticks on to the soul

in the latter's physical expression through BMI, it gets (a borrowed)

sentience. Now the soul interacts with the universe of matter as well as

with the other living beings. But even this interaction has to take place

only through the medium of the BMI.

 

There is therefore a seemingly endless play of the sentient Consciousness

within and the insentient universe of matter outside through the medium of

the BMI. In this play, the sentient Consciousness within, which is nothing

but the spark of the Absolute, is called 'PuruSha' or Self.

 

[important note: I plan to use 'PuruSha' in this context systematically,

though its English equivalent 'Self' is available. The 'Self' is already

the English equivalent of 'Atman'. 'Atman' and 'PuruSha' will turn out to

be the same at the end of all this discussion, but at this point of the

discussion where we are dwelling on the 'triple personality', it is better

to keep the word 'PuruSha' for purposes of technical clarity of

communication as we go along. And the word 'PuruSha' has the inbuilt meaning

'the resident in the body' which aptly describes what we are talking about

in this discussion.]

 

[Optional note: 'The resident in the body' - this meaning comes from the

derivation of the word 'puruSha' from its etymological roots. 'puri shete

iti puruShaH' - He who resides in the body-city is puruSha. Recall (5 -

13) 'navadvAre pure dehI'.]

 

Everything else, including the interaction with other beings, is of course

prakRti. This interplay of puruSha and prakRti is what constitutes our

passage through life.

 

Now the Lord says: There are two puruShas. (15 - 16).

 

They are: the perishable puruSha (also called 'empirical self') and the

imperishable puruSha. The perishable one expresses itself through the BMI.

When the BMI vanishes in the cycle of time, it can no more express itself.

So this personality is termed "Perishable" (Sanskrit: 'kShara'). The full

Sanskrit term is "kShara-puruSha".

 

It is this Perishable PuruSha - whom we shall hereafter denote by 'PP' for

convenience of brevity in writing - who does all the work in the external

world and thinks all the thoughts.

 

[A note for the novice: In my style of a mathematics teacher who uses a lot

of symbols for communication, may I suggest that as you read these posts, do

not keep reading 'PP' as 'PP' but keep reading it as 'Perishable puruSha'.

That will protect you against possible confusions that might arise when I

introduce other notations like 'IP' - imperishable puruSha ! Also by reading

it for what it means, the sentences will not tend to become unintelligible

mechanical mantras!]

 

It is he, the PP, who is the "I" of ordinary conversation. Vedanta says it

is not 'the real I' because of the perishability of PP. He is the mutable,

thinking, acting personality, subjected by Ignorance to the outward workings

of PrakRti.

 

We said the soul expresses itself through the BMI. But in so expressing

itself, it invariably makes the mistake of thinking it is just the PP and

nothing more. In other words, the soul commits the colossal error of

identifying itself with the BMI. This colossal error is the beginningless

ignorance. And here starts all the problems of life. All the pleasure and

pain, ups and downs, light and darkness, good and bad, that the BMI suffers

through, are mistakenly assumed by the soul as its own experiences. Not only

this. All the actions of the BMI are also appropriated by the soul. Thus

arises the common expression: 'I am the doer', 'I am the experiencer'.

 

Just to quote from one of the hundreds of places where Shankara emphasizes

this process as a superimposition, here is one from his Commentary on

Brahma-SUtra II-3-29: 'Though the Self is not an agent and experiencer, and

though it has no transmigratoriness and is ever free, still it comes to

have the states of being an Agent and an experiencer, this being caused by

the superimposition of the modes of intellect acting as a limiting adjunct.'

("buddhy-upAdhi-dharmAdhyAsa-.... nityamuktasya sata AtmanaH").

 

The PP (or the soul in its present state of oneness with the PP) is involved

in the actions of Nature. He reflects the different workings of the modes

of Nature. He associates himself with the doings of prakRti and thinks he

is the doer. He identifies himself with the play of personality and clouds

his self-knowledge with the ego-sense in PrakRti so that he thinks himself

as the ego-doer of works. (3 - 27).

 

The second of the triple personality is 'the Imperishable PuruSha' - which

we shall denote hereafter by 'IP' for convenience of brevity in writing. It

is a higher, deeper, reality -- some exponents call it 'inner reality' -

than the PP. It is the eternal impersonal self within. It is the

'sat-chid-Ananda' (Existence-Knowledge-Bliss) of Vedanta. The full Sanskrit

term is "akShara-puruSha" -- 'akShara' meaning 'imperishable'. It has no

share in the action and movement of the PP except to support it by its

presence and be a non-participating witness.

 

Some one pinches my body. It hurts. Who feels this hurt? I feel the hurt.

Who is this I that is speaking? It is the PP. Why does the PP feel the hurt?

Because it has identified itself with the BMI. Therefore it becomes the

experiencer ('bhoktA'). Recall that the soul has already fallen into the

colossal error of thinking that it is the PP and nothing more.

 

Not only do I feel the hurt, but I flare up at the other person. Who is this

I that is flaring up now? It is again the PP. Why does the PP flare up?

Because it has identified itself with the BMI. As a consequence of this

identification, it not only experiences the hurt, but falls into the trap of

the gang of peace-breakers like anger and ego and flares back. So it becomes

the 'kartA' (doer).

 

What does the Lord say on this now? He says there are two puruShas -

perishable and imperishable. The imperishable is never hurt and can never be

hurt, says He. "This cannot be cut into pieces; this cannot be burnt; this

cannot be tainted; this cannot be dried". (2 - 24)

 

So He says: "My dear Arjuna, You (the PP / soul) are wrongly identifying

yourself with this BMI. Don't do this. Identify yourself with the IP within

you. Then there will be no hurt. Only Happiness"

 

This is the bottom line. This is the essential philosophical content of the

entire teaching of the Gita. This is the message of all spiritual teaching.

This is the grand recipe for Happiness.

 

Vedanta comes to our help in analysing this message for us. Vedanta reduces

everything to five fundamentals.

'sat' (Existence) -- revealed by the fact that it 'exists' (*asti*)

'chit' (Consciousness) -- revealed by the fact of 'knowing' (*bhAti*)

'Ananda' (Bliss) -- revealed by the fact of 'happiness' (*priyam*)

'nAma' (Name) -- everything has a name

'rUpaM' (Form) -- every visible thing has a form.

 

The first three are permanent, eternal. Each one of them constitutes what we

called the IP. The last two are ephemeral, transient. Our BMI belongs to

the last two above. Anything in our experience belongs to this 'Name' and

'Form'.

 

When somebody pinches me I feel the pain. It is really the BMI that senses

the pain and reacts to it. But the BMI would not have done it if 'I' were

not there. (for example, a dead body) - that is, if the sentience, borrowed

from the IP within, were not there. It is the association of 'I' with the

BMI that makes 'me' feel and react. The 'superimposition' of BMI and of its

experiences on the 'I' is the problem. When I, the one whose outer

personality is called Krishnamurthy, ceases to associate the 'I' with the

BMI and remains what it should be, namely, the IP, there should be no

feeling of pain and no provocation for a reaction or action. This is what

Krishna says to Arjuna.

 

Thus all action happens only when the association of the permanent facet of

the individual namely the 'sat-chit-Ananda' facet is associated with the

'nAma-rUpa' facet of the same individual. Or, it may also be said the other

way. The 'nAma-rUpa' facet and its goings-on are superimposed on the

'sat-chid-Ananda' facet. It is this association/superimposition that is

the actor and the reactor. It is this assoication/superimposition that is

the feeler, the thinker. Who makes this association/superimposition? It is

the empirical Self, the Jiva. All that Vedanta says is this: Get over this

mixing up of the 'sat-cit-Ananda' with the 'nAma-rUpa'.

 

To sum up, we ended up the previous post with the question " Who is the 'We'

in the statement 'We are identifying ourselves with the BMI'?" It can be

answered now. 'We', the agent or subject who does the identification is the

PP/soul/ 'empirical self' who expresses himself through the BMI. If we do

not so identify then the hurt or pain which affects the body, mind,

intellect will not be 'felt'. (Easy to say this! But at this point it has

to be granted at least as an academic truism). At least this is what

Krishna says. It is at this point of the discussion we have to spend

considerable thought on the key-words "non-participating witness" in the

paragraph above that introduced the IP. It is in fact the punchline of

Vedanta, particularly of advaita.

 

We shall take this and the allied concept of 'the empirical self' in the

next two posts. They are likely to be dense in content. Be prepared to

proceed slowly and steadily!

 

(To be Continued)

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

 

For almost everything you wanted to know about Hindu philosophy, go to

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/

For an English translation of Kanchi Mahaswamigal's Discourses on Advaita

Sadhana go to

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/VK2/Advaita_Saadhanaa.html

advaitin <advaitin> , "V.

Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote:

>

> Namaste all.

>

> Series on Advaita for the Novice

>

> "I am neither the Doer nor the Experiencer" - 2

> So He says: "My dear Arjuna, You (the PP / soul) are wrongly

> identifying yourself with this BMI. Don't do this. Identify

> yourself with the IP within you. Then there will be no hurt.

> Only Happiness"

>

 

 

PraNams Prof VK Ji,

 

Aren't Pleasure/Pain and Happiness two sides of the same coin. Doesn't

Happiness belong to the realm of "Mind". Once I identify with "IP", do I

still recognize "Happiness".

 

Or the definition of "Happiness" is different here than the common one?

 

As always, you posts are lucid. Just that the subject matter is a

difficult one.

 

Regards

 

Sudesh Pillutla

advaitin, "Sudesh Pillutla"

<sudeshpillutla wrote:

>

>

> advaitin

<advaitin> , "V.

> Krishnamurthy" <profvk@> wrote:

> >

> > Namaste all.

> >

> > Series on Advaita for the Novice

> >

> > "I am neither the Doer nor the Experiencer" - 2

> > So He says: "My dear Arjuna, You (the PP / soul) are wrongly

> > identifying yourself with this BMI. Don't do this. Identify

> > yourself with the IP within you. Then there will be no hurt.

> > Only Happiness"

> >

>

>

> PraNams Prof VK Ji,

>

> Aren't Pleasure/Pain and Happiness two sides of the same coin.

Doesn't

> Happiness belong to the realm of "Mind". Once I identify with "IP",

do I

> still recognize "Happiness".

>

> Or the definition of "Happiness" is different here than the common

one?

 

 

Namaste Sudsh-ji

 

Yes, you are perfectly right. Thanks for pointing it out. 'Happiness'

belongs to the realm of the mind. The word 'Happiness' in the above-

quoted paragraph of mine is the Infinite Bliss of the Transcendental

Self, where there is no mind, no questions of happiness and sorrow.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

Professorji :

 

i am silently reading your series on 'Who is the doer -experiencer'

and trying to grasp the contents therein. it is my 'break' time

companion at work . thanx so much . may i kindly request you to

quote the relevant sanskrit verse of Srimad Bhagwat gita

sise by side - this will enhance the discussion , in my humble

opinion.

 

Professorji, this morning i was listening to Sri Vishnu Sahasaranama

as part of my Wednesday morning routine

 

Putatma paramatma cha muktanam parama gatih

Avyayah purusha sakshi kshetrajno~kshara eva cha

 

 

when i heard the Nama Akshara ( nama 17)

 

meaning of this nama

 

One whose greatness never diminishes over time in spite of being

enjoyed by the muktas constantly.

na ksharati iti aksharah .

 

His greatness is innate, and does not derive from something

external. So it never diminishes.

In Nirukti, this is explained as follows:

 

"sadA anubhUyamAno'pi nissIma guNa gauravAt |

muktai: kvacit na ksharati iti akshara: parikIrtita: ||"

 

Sri Sankara's interpretation is: "sa eva na ksharati iti aksharah -

He alone exists without dying.

 

now of course The SRIMAD BHAGVAT GITA CHAPTER 15 VERSE 16 MENTIONS

THREE KINDS OF PURUSHAS , RIGHT ?

 

IS AKSHARA PURUSHA 'BRAHMAN' ?

 

OR IS IT 'ISHWARA' ?

 

THEN WHO IS PURUSHOTTAMA ?

 

i read somewhere that the Trinity mentioned in this verse - kshara ,

akshara , purushottama correspond to the holy trinity of the

Christian faith - the father , the son and the holy spirit.

 

my gurudeva always used to emphasise that it is wrong to

interpret 'nirguna' as One without gunas - reather it should be

interpreted as one who is beyond gunas ! Gunatita ! so , if

wedescribe purusha as 'akshara ' are we describing Brahman or are we

referring to a personal ishta nishta ? just some silly questions ! i

thought i will ask anyway !

 

MAY I SHARE MY FAVORITE VERSE FROM tAITTRIYA UPANISHAD IN THIS

CONTEXT ?

 

Thus the Taittiriya Upanisad says:

 

raso vai sah

rasam hy evayam labdhvanandi bhavati

ko hy evanyat kah pranyat

yad esa akasa anando na syat

esa hy evanandayati (2.7)

 

The supreme truth is rasa. The jiva becomes blissful on attaining

this rasa. Who would work with body and prana, if this blissful,

complete form did not exist. He gives bliss to all.

 

This is how krishna bhaktas interpret this verse where the He refers

to none other than Sri Mahavishnu!

 

" madhuram madhuradi-pater akhilam madhuram"

 

Salutations to the Lord of the sweetness , Sri Murali Manohara !

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk

wrote:

>

> Namaste all.

>

> Series on Advaita for the Novice

>

> "I am neither the Doer nor the Experiencer" - 2

>

> (For No.1 go to post #35050)

>

> Two 'Selves'

>

>

advaitin, "dhyanasaraswati"

<dhyanasaraswati wrote:

>

> Professorji :

>

> i am silently reading your series on 'Who is the doer -experiencer'

> and trying to grasp the contents therein. it is my 'break' time

> companion at work . thanx so much . may i kindly request you to

> quote the relevant sanskrit verse of Srimad Bhagwat gita

> sise by side - this will enhance the discussion , in my humble

> opinion.

>

> Professorji, this morning i was listening to Sri Vishnu

Sahasaranama

> as part of my Wednesday morning routine

>

> Putatma paramatma cha muktanam parama gatih

> Avyayah purusha sakshi kshetrajno~kshara eva cha

>

 

 

Namaste Dhyanasaraswati-ji

 

As we go along, you will see too many quotes from the Bhagavad-Gita.I

am not giving the verses of Gita in Sanskrit because, I think it

will clutter up the reading by the 'novice' who may be uninitiated

in Sanskrit and secondly the Gita shlokas are available and easily

locatable online.

 

Regarding "kshetrajno-'kshara eva ca" quote that you have rightly

pointed out from Vishnu Sahasranama, please go to

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/1208page3.html

website for an explanation.

 

Regarding the other questions in your mail, on the 'three' puruShas,

please wait for #s3 and #4 in this series.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk