Monday, October 23, 2017
Sunday, October 22, 2017
Sunday, October 1, 2017
Calling the Ego’s Bluff - 2
Vedanta points out that there has been a major error in the
understanding of ‘I”. Let us understand the error.
We find that our understanding of ‘I’ is dependent on a
number of conclusions, which are based on observed experiences.
This is beginning of the cascading errors which constitute
our understanding of ‘I’.
Vedanta points out that I is
the changeless sakshi, of the nature of self-evident consciousness in whose ever-presence all experiences are
illumined, observed to take place. The changing
world is an observed experience, the changing body is an observed experience
and the changing mind is an observed experience.
Vedanta points out that it is our common conclusion that being
the subject, I am not the observed experienced world. How then can I conclude
that I am the observed, experienced body or mind?
This opens up the enquiry.
Let us look at facts which are pointed out by Vedanta.
1.
There must be a changeless observer otherwise
called the sakshi or the true ‘I’ in
whose presence change is observed – otherwise it is not possible know that there
has been change.
2.
So everything observed/experienced becomes an
object of knowledge for the sakshi.
Indeed all conclusions regarding the self are all objects only for the sakshi.
3.
Whatever is observed/experienced is in state of
flux always – so its presence as a constant entity cannot be established. The
body is in a state of flux, so is the mind, and of course so is the world.
4.
Again the object experienced/observed be it
thought or any physical object can never be independent of the observer – nor is
it independent of n numbers of local factors.
Vedanta asks this question, how can any conclusion which is
based on the changing, dependent, observed objects, regarding the self-evident
conscious being, the ‘I’, the changeless sakshi,
be true? Any conclusion regarding the sakshi, the true ‘I’ based on anything observed can
only be FALSE.
The self is not a conclusion based on any experience, or
series of experiences, or memory of experiences. The self is self-evident
consciousness, who is independent of every experience and yet the essence or
content of every experience.
What is the sense of ‘I’? Really if we analyse it, it is a
set of conclusions which poses as an independent entity – and all actions are
rooted in this entity interacting with the environment.
We already saw that all conclusions based on the body-mind
and attributed to ‘I’, the self-evident
basic conscious being, are false.
When we examine the conclusion ‘I am a doer’, we find that
the ‘doer’ conclusion is based on observed fleeting experiences of actions –
for example folding clothes, cooking food, eating the food, walking, talking
etc. All these actions were observed in the presence of the changeless
conscious being – the sakshi.
The changeless sakshi
does no action – in its presence, the action is revealed to be taking place at
the level of body-mind. We cannot call the changeless sakshi as doer.
Then who is the ‘doer’. This ‘doer’ is not a permanent
entity. The action takes place thru the agency of the mind-body and the action
is over even as it takes place. Is there
a real entity here, an independent entity here to own up the action?
If the doer-entity is real, it must always be present. But
it is not always there – in waking itself sometimes a doer, sometimes an experience
... again absent in deep-sleep. Is there any permanent entity here to whom we
call the ‘doer’?
There is only a sort of constructed pseudo-entity, who is
the result of endless conclusions based on observed experiences superimposed on
the changeless, ever-present conscious being. This constructed pseudo-entity
poses as an independent, permanent entity and concludes it is a doer and experience
as well.
For the one who has recognized the truth of the changeless
self, there is no more concluding anything based on any observed experience –
and the person is free of the conclusion that ‘I am a doer/experiencer’. The
sort of constructed pseudo-entity dissolves in the wake of recognition of
truth. So the empirical doer is not taken to be real anymore.
Om Tat Sat