Jñāna

Purpose and Value of Worship

Krishnamurthy Ramakrishna

The word ‘worship’ raises a number of questions in almost everyone, like - What is worship? Whom to worship? Why should I worship? – Purpose of worship. How to worship? What do I get out of worship? – Value of worship.

Some of these questions are very legitimate and need to be understood by youngsters and adults alike – This article is attempting to review these topics to help us understand the basis of worship and the benefits thereupon.

What is worship?

Worship is an act of adoration for someone out of intense love. This intense love is described as bhakti or devotion. This act of adoration is expressed in multiple ways, discussed later. In order to develop this devotion leading to worship, an association is necessary, which can best be understood by the networking model, in the context of our professional life.

Networking is association with people – preferably with a person of a higher professional standing - who could possibly influence or guide in a person’s growth, either by mentoring or by taking a personal interest in the individual’s growth. In the limiting case, the individual is in a worship mode of the mentor who could influence his or her career. So we can understand that worship is an association with respect, with another person, who could influence him/her in their growth. If one is seeking spiritual growth, the networking mentor is called a Guru.

Whom to worship?

In a person’s life, different persons function as a Guru at different stages of spiritual development. Mother is the first Guru for a child. Mother introduces God to the child as the ultimate to be worshipped – the association/networking that begets desires. The child believes so, for some time and follows thru. But as she/he grows older, the young adolescent confused about a clear understanding of God, he/she starts drifting away from the ‘Entity God’; the individual is unable to develop an association with God to love Her or Him. The social interaction of the individual during the teen years further alienates the individual from God, to the extent that some of them develop allergy towards God, even without really understanding what God is? The adolescent may or may not be satisfied with the description of God that the parents offer; even some parents could be confused too. This situation worsens as the child gets secular education, where Science teaching is mandatory and religious teaching is missing. The teachings of Science – Science of inert objects – in itself is not sufficient to understand nature of God; the young adult cannot distinguish between matter and spirit. Then he/she is drawn away from God, believing that existence of God cannot be proved and therefore God does not exist. The confusion about God is so strong that most people who emphatically claim “that there is no God,” stumble if questioned what is God (even to deny the existence of God, one must have an idea of what God is)!

Who is this God? What is His Form? How to recognize Him? Is the God a He or a She? Is God the idol we see and worship in temples? Unless we understand the nature of God, we will be unable to develop an association with God and thus to make spiritual progress.

The Upaniṣads teach “मातृ देवो भव। पितृ देवो भव। आचार्य देवो भव। अतिथि देवो भव ॥ - Worship your mother as God, worship your Father as God, worship your teacher (Guru) as God, worship your guest as God.” This is the test of the highest spiritual growth. As much as we love and respect our parents, the thought of worshipping them is alien to most people; the thought of worshipping Guru and a guest as God is far more alien. The ego syndrome of an adult in the 20s – ‘I know better than my mother or father' – sometimes even precludes us from giving respect, let alone worship them. This syndrome seems to be gaining strength from generation to generation. The means to develop the spiritual maturity and strength to worship our mother and father is through the worship of God however undefined He is to us at this time. When I say undefined, I mean by the standard means of knowledge – perception through our sense organs. God cannot be understood by these means of knowledge, because He stands beyond the realm of the sense organs. We have to experience Him deep in our heart. This is where the Guru comes in to help us understand God.

Many people have a difficulty in recognizing a stone idol or a metal image as God. What appears as an inanimate stone idol in a temple or a silver figurine to be worshipped by a human being as God, calling himself animate and having a free will is anathema to Science educated youths. So if we need to have shraddha (conviction) towards God, we need to understand how to see God in the Idol.

Swami Paramananda Bharati [1] discusses God from a very basic scientific understanding, starting from the very basic principle of Science.

Inert body: an inert body continues in its state of rest or of uniform motion unless acted upon by an external force (Newton’s First Law). Our scriptures, preceding Newton several thousands of years, posit that an inert body has no intrinsic ability to manifest a change – it needs an external cause to be activated to a new state and never by itself. So far so good, that Science is not violating scriptures.

Let us take an example: a ball to be moved from one location to another is kicked by a person to effect the change in place – kicking is the external force described by Science to effect the change of state from one location to the other. Science’s interest ends here by describing the parameters of force – point of application, magnitude and direction. The shāstra (Upaniṣads, Bhagavad Gītā etc.) probes further. The force itself being inert, cannot determine these parameters of force. The leg that is kicking the ball is also an inert body and has no ability to define the parameters of the force or act on itself; the leg is activated by the Prāṇa (vital energy) and mind to implement the task. The mind being a collection of thoughts (which is also inert), is dependent on the intellect to determine and feed that information. The intellect determines the parameters of force (magnitude of force, point of application of force and the direction of force); the intellect being inert also cannot act independently and needs another agency for it to function. That agency happens to be the Sentiency present in all beings and somehow taken for granted by most people. The Sentiency is what energizes the intellect and this Sentiency is nothing but the Animate Free Will, guiding every human being in making the decisions with her/his intellect. The Animate Free Will is external to the inert aspect of human beings, and is the external agency akin to the external force of Newton’s laws. But how did the inert intellect attain the benefit of the sentiency? The śāstra describes the Conscious entity called Ātma that supports (energizes) the intellect in this instance, like the magnet moves the inert iron filings in its immediate proximity. Likewise, the intellect, being closest to the Ātma or Consciousness, in terms of its subtlety is closest to the intellect and provides the sentiency to the intellect for its own operation as well as to communicate with the mind (like the iron filings activated by the magnet). This Consciousness or Ātma is the ultimate entity external to the inert body/mind complex, yet integral to animate entities that supports the decision making in every living being.

Now let us come to nature, where changes like Earthquakes, Hurricanes, Tsunamis, etc. are happening. Nature being inert, the support of an “animate free will” is needed for these changes to happen. It is our experience that no human being or collection of human beings is responsible for these changes in nature. So it is reasonable to expect that there must be an “animate free will” in nature, which we are unable to see. For example, scientists can seed a rain and make rainfall, where the scientist is the “animate free will”. Then it is unreasonable to expect that natural rain is happening by itself; there must be an animate free will behind this natural rainfall. The shāstra calls this animate free will as ‘Varuṇa devata’ or presiding Deity for water. Such an “animate free will” is described as God in our scriptures. The Varuṇa devata is also supported by the Consciousness or Ātma in its activities, to generate its animate free will. Though the free wills of the individuals and the Varuṇa devata are different, the Consciousness or Ātma of humans and devatas are one and the same (the Ātma of a sinner is the same as the Ātma of an angel). Then what separates the Devatas from human beings? The answer is very simple – the current Devatas were human beings in previous births or previous creation. They are born as Devatas, due to intense yajñas (a form of worship, invoking the Lord in fire) and they got promoted to the management of the Cosmic System in their current life (just like a diligent and consistent performance in professional careers receives promotion to management). This is one of the values of worship – Fire worship is also a form of idol worship.

In idol worship, it is the attitude with which one approaches worship, which elevates her or him, rather than the process of worship itself. The idol is a product of nature and one can clearly see that the idol (and nature) is no different from God, when one examines the declaration of Lord Kṛṣṇa in the Bhagavad Gītā [2]

भूमिरापोऽनलो वायुः खं मनो बुद्धिरेव च ।

अहंकार इतीयं मे भिन्ना प्रकृतिरष्टधा । ।

अपरेयमितस्त्वन्यां प्रकृतिं विद्धि मे पराम् ।

जीवभूतां महाबाहो ययेदं धार्यते जगत्

Earth, water, fire, air, space, mind, intellect and ego (all inert) are my lower nature. Apart from these, my higher nature is the “Life sustaining Ātma” or Consciousness that supports the entire living beings in this universe. Both His lower and higher natures pervade the entire universe. Since God pervades everywhere, every material mined and processed from this earth is a proxy for God. Understanding this, one is able understand worshipping an idol – made of elements of nature, which are nothing but expressions of God that our sense organs can perceive.

How to worship?

The Lord may be worshipped in any form that the devotee associates Him with, based on his emotional composition. Bhāgavata lists nine ways of worship –

श्रवणं कीर्तनं विष्णोः स्मरणं पादसेवनम् ।

अर्चनं वन्दनं दास्यं सख्यं आत्म निवेदनम् ॥

shravaṇaṁ kīrtanaṁ viṣṇoḥ smaraṇaṁ pādasevanam

archanaṁ vandanaṁ dāsyaṁ sakhyaṁ Ātma nivedanam

Listening to the glories of God (exemplified by king Parīkṣit), singing His glories (Sage Śuka), His constant remembrance (Prahlāda), His service (Lakṣmaṇa), His Worship (Śabari), saluting Him (Akrūra), being his servant (Hanumān), intense friendship (Arjuna, Vibhīṣaṇa and Sugrīva) and offering the Self (Emperor Bali) are the means of pleasing Viṣṇu. One can choose any form of worship that is consistent with his or her aptitude.

What is the purpose of worship?

We have an understanding of God. How can He influence my life? What benefit do I enjoy in worshipping God? Lord Kṛṣṇa provides an answer in the Bhagavad Gītā [3]

अधिष्टानं तथा कर्ता करणं च पृथग्विधम् ।

विविधाश्च पृथक्चेष्टा दैवं चैवात्र पञ्चमम् ॥

There are five variables in the successful accomplishment of any project. They are (1) the platform or the environment of the project, (2) the doer, (3) the various tools used in the execution of the project, (4) the various tasks associated with the project and (5) God the fifth factor. The first four are in the control of the individual and the last is not in his control, but God’s call. Is it reasonable to expect then that by worshipping God, one will have success in all his endeavors in his time frame? That would be the discretion of God and not a right of the worshipper. Secondly, God may not or need not meet our time schedules. Every action has its associated fruits of action for sure, but when and how those fruits are delivered to us is the choice of the Lord.

Sri D. R. Venkataramanan [4] posits that God has three responsibilities under His portfolio. They are in the order of priority as follows -

1. Organization / Maintenance of Universe
2. Administer Justice per Law of Karma of individuals
3. Uphold Devotees’ fruits of action

His macro responsibilities (1 and 2) are priority over the micro responsibility (3). He neither responds in upholding the devotee, compromising the maintenance of dharma in the universe nor does He uphold the devotee in violation of his past karma. If our karma is in support of His macro responsibilities, there is a higher probability of Him fulfilling our desires in our time frame.

Value of worship

It now becomes obvious that consistency in worship (through many lives) becomes the basis for God’s grace (a diligent worker all year has a higher probability of promotion over a sporadically diligent worker). God’s Grace excludes favor of one at the cost of other person(s). Consistency in worship will remove any barrier that may separate him from God’s macro responsibilities and allows for God’s grace to flow unobstructed. That said, God always responds to Devotee’s need vs. his want. The devotee may not know what he needs (like a toddler who does not know what it needs). The devotee may equate his need with his want. But God knows what the devotee needs (the mother knows what the toddler needs) and so graces him. As his relationship with God strengthens with consistent worship, the devotee is less focused on the wants and she worships God for the love of Him. When the devotee graduates to this level of love for the Lord, Kṛṣṇa declares that He will take the responsibility for the yoga and kṣema of the devotee (योगक्षेमं वहाम्यहम् [5] – I will take care of his yoga (providing for what the devotee does not have) and kṣema (protecting and preserving what he has). This is the value of worship for the devotee.

References

1. Foundations of Dharma – Pujya sri Paramananda Bharati Swamiji, Jnanasamvardhana Granthamala, 2006.
2. Bhagavad Gita – Chapter 7, Verses 4 and 5.
3. Bhagavad Gita – Chapter 18, Verse 14.
4. Kaggakkondu Kaipidi (A Handbook for Kagga – reference Verse 506)) – Sri D.R. Venkataramanan, Sri Nityananda Printers, Bangalore, 2000
5. Bhagavad Gita – Chapter 9, Verse 22

Who is a Paṇḍita? Or Who am I?

Krishnamurthy Ramakrishna

Lord Kṛṣṇa introduces this word Paṇḍita in opening his instructions to Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gītā as follows –

अशोच्यानन्वशोचस्त्वं प्रज्ञावादांश्च भाषसे ।

गतासूनगतासूंश्च नानुशोचन्ति पण्डिताः ॥२-११॥

aśocyānanvaśocastvaṁ prajnāvādāṁśca bhāṣase |

gatāsūnagatāsūṁśca nānuśocanti paṇḍitāḥ ||2-11||

You are grieving for the unworthy of grieving, yet speak words of wisdom; the spiritually wise grieve neither for the living nor for the dead.

So the opening instruction of Kṛṣṇa to Arjuna is a jolt to every human being, who is conditioned to grieve for the departed relatives, friends etc. Here Kṛṣṇa describes that one who does not have grief and attachment or not disturbed / agitated by śoka and moha at any time and any place is called a Paṇḍita – a spiritually wise person. So how does a Paṇḍita differ from one who is not?

Here Kṛṣṇa is implying that the śoka and moha is a direct consequence of awareness of multiplicity and non-recognition of non-duality. This awareness of multiplicity is a direct reflection of superimposing a limitation on one self – “I am limited to this body.” Imposing this limitation, obviously every human being is recognizing other beings and objects; this recognition leads to likes and dislikes, which in turn lead to attraction to likes and to keep away the dislikes, which he or she is unable to fulfill all the time. This inability to fulfill gives rise to śoka and moha - grief and delusion.

Where is this limitation coming from and how to overcome this limitation is the subject matter of the entire Bhagavad Gītā. In this context, Kṛṣṇa introduces the Paṇḍita who has overcome grief and delusion by overcoming the limitation the non-Paṇḍita experiences; the spiritually wise will not experience the limitation.

So, one has to become a Paṇḍita or spiritually wise to overcome śoka and moha. He who does not grieve at any time, in any situation is a Paṇḍita. Spiritual wisdom means emotional equilibrium – does not see anything different from him or her. What does this mean? What is meant by I don’t find any difference between you, you, and me? Is it possible? This is discussed extensively in the Upaniṣads and the Bhagavad Gītā. Among these Upaniṣads, the Mānḍūkya Upaniṣad uniquely explores the real identity of a person through the three states of experience (Avasthātraya) – the waking state (jāgrat), the dream state (svapna) and the deep sleep state (suṣupti). These experiences in these three states are discussed below.

The Waking state.

The waking state is that state in which the individual is experiencing his surroundings through his sense organs. He collects information of the outside world through his five sense organs (eyes, ears, nose, tongue and skin) and acts upon the outside world through his five organs of action or motor organs (organ of speech, hands, legs, excretory and genitals). In this process, he recognizes and utilizes the sense organs, organs of action and the mind as the system interacting with the surroundings. The sense organs interacting with sense objects are bringing information of the surroundings, are processed by the mind, and the individual comes to understand his surroundings. So, in this waking state, the human being is extrovert - engaging his physical body and mind in various activities and in transacting with the surroundings. In this state, the individual associates himself with the body and mind as he transacts with the outside world. The human being utilizes his or her 19 organs – five sense organs (ear, eye, nose, tongue and skin), five organs of action (hands, legs, organ of speech, reproductive and excretory organs), five vital energies (prāṇa, apāna, vyāna, udāna and samāna - each vital energy performing a different function in maintaining the body – five energies performing five functions), and four aspects of internal organs (mind - manas, intellect - buddhi, storage - citta and ego - ahaṅkara). If he is walking, he identifies himself as a walker, if he is teaching, he identifies himself as a teacher, if he is seeing, identifies himself as a seer etc. So, in reality, is he a walker or a teacher or seer or all of them or something else? In reality, he cannot be all of them – he is a person at best. In so transacting, the human being therefore uses his body as a proxy for walker, teacher or something else and therefore reckons himself as “I am this body” during the wakeful state.

Since every cell of the body is dying and new cells being born every second of his life, this body is not the same as the one it was yesterday or last year. So if he is this body, which body is he? The body at the time of birth or the current body? At birth this body was small; with passage of time, the body has grown in to this huge body; the organs are changing; body fracture causes replacement of body parts with some metallic or plastic parts. Heart failure/heart problems cause replacement of heart, with the old heart replaced. A person, who has all or most of these problems, has many of his organs removed and replaced by artificial parts. Now is he his original body? Is he this prosthesis body? He is obviously not this prosthesis body. But to say he is his original body, where is the justification to claim he is the original body, when that body has been totally replaced both by body endocrinology or surgical replacement of body organs? Yet he is still existent without the original body or body components. So it is hard to justify, or even absurd to say that he is the body!

A person meets a friend after some 50 years; yet the friend recognizes him as the same person he had associated with, some 50 years ago, in spite of him having a totally different body. The body has changed, but the person has not changed. The person continues to exist, but not with the same body. So obviously he cannot be the body. So what else can he be?

However, it is everyone’s experience that he or she utter words like ‘my hand hurts or my mind tells me,’etc.; obviously he has a confusion about his identity – he implies in the above phrases that he is different from his hand or mind, reinforcing this confusion about himself.

The body is engaged in activity and he mindlessly identifies himself with the activity. This obviously needs to be questioned. So if there is a doubt if he is the body or not, then who could he be? The waking state experiences thus only expose the futility of the waking experiences to appropriately categorize his identity. To further and clearly establish his identity, the Mānḍūkya Upaniṣad explores his experiences in the dream and deep sleep states.

The Dream State

After exerting all day, the individual is tired at the end of the day and seeks rest in sleeping for the night. As he hits the bed, he could experience a dream or go to deep sleep. In the dream state the individual is introvert – he has no association with the outside world; his sense organs and organs of action which were active during the waking state have also gone to seep – he is disconnected from the outside world; the vital energy (prāṇa) is not resting, but continues its activity in the background. However his internal organs – manas, buddhi, citta and ahaṅkara (mind, storage, intellect and ego) are active. So, in the dream he transacts with in his mind only. In the dream, the impressions he has gathered during the waking state project an activity, without the organs of action and the sense organs participating in the dream act. In dream, he is lying in his bed in his home or elsewhere; but he may experience being engaged in some activity elsewhere. After waking from the dream, he may narrate the experience of the dream. For example, he may be lying in his bed in New York; in the dream he may be walking the streets of Los Angeles. So the physical reality of his lying in his bed in New York and the dream reality of his walking in Los Angeles (may not even be in the same town or country where he is sleeping) have to be reconciled - he is both sleeping in his bed as well as walking elsewhere at the same time. During the dream, the world of his experience does not include his physical body, the sense organs and the organs of action. So his physical body and the organs are outside the system of his dream experience. After waking up from the dream state, he narrates that in the dream he was walking in a different town – say Los Angeles; it is a physical fact that he is on his bed in New York against which his walking in the streets of Los Angeles is to be reconciled. The dream experience is a recall of his past experiences of separate events of visiting Los Angeles and impressions of walking stored in his memory. The space and time relations of the dream need not even be identical to the space and time relations of his waking experience. So should he be identified as a sleeper or walker? Is he the body lying in his bed or the walker elsewhere? From the body perspective he is a sleeper, but from the perspective of mind he is a walker in a different place. The experience belongs to the mind. He has dropped his body that went to bed; the dream is experienced in another body (human or non-human) captured in his mind and this body is the object of dream; all the sense organ transactions have merged into the mind. To transact in the waking world he uses his physical body as well as mind, where as he can transact with his mind only in the dream world. So the dream experience establishes he is not the body for sure, but there is no doubt of his existence itself – because he is experiencing something. There was a question of his true identity of being a body, during the waking state itself; and that doubt has been validated in the dream state that he is not the body (because he can experience the dream without the body). From these two experiences of the waking and dream states, it is to be concluded that he is not the body. Therefore the dream experience negates he is the body. Though he is assured “he is not the body,” his real identity is still uncertain. At best, the dream experience identifies him with his mind. The dream state experience has affirmed him, “I am the mind,” because the mind is present both in New York lying on his bed as well as in Los Angeles supporting his walking. Then can the dream experience suggest his real identity to be ‘he is the mind?” Does this identity bear out? Additional data is necessary to establish whether he is really the mind or is his real identity is something else.

The mind of course sees all the modifications of the body; often we hear one may say “my mind is agitated” or “my mind tells me,” etc. These expressions affirm that I am different from the mind. So the waking state and dream state together can tell the person, he is not the body, and the mind is different from the body; but falls short of clearly establishing his identity as mind also – he is mind or not? Additionally the inert mind alone can neither experience the dream nor recall the dream at a later time. Therefore to establish the real identity and the sentiency in the mind, the Upaniṣad explores his experience in deep sleep state.

The Deep Sleep State

Now coming to deep sleep state, the person is sleeping well, void of even dream and does not have any knowledge of the world, since his mind has also gone to sleep. The mind is not available to him in real time in deep sleep and he can’t say if he is present or not - “the waking I and the Dream I are non-existent in the deep sleep and I don’t know who I am in deep sleep.” Next morning he does not say he was dead; he recalls his experience - ‘I had excellent sleep and I was happy.’ He was enjoying good sleep, though he could not experience it in real time. Therefore his recollection of his sleep in the morning ensures that he was present in deep sleep (and was not dead) – his existence in deep sleep is proved beyond any doubt by his reference to deep sleep. He enjoyed sleep and later reports that he enjoyed good sleep when he comes to the waking state again. Therefore it is obvious that continuity existed between his deep sleep and waking states. So he should have been present when he was in deep sleep, and he should be present in the waking state to narrate it, establishing the continuity. This can only be possible if there was an ‘Entity X’ witnessing his sleeping well in the deep sleep state and the ‘Entity X’ be present in the waking state to report that experience of the deep sleep state. By extension, it can be inferred that the ‘Entity X’ was present in the dream state also.

The physical body and the mind are both inert and the body/mind is not autonomous (self-sufficient to express what is happening in the body). So the body must be deriving sentiency from another entity to have the awareness of what is happening in the body. This entity must be conscious (self-aware) to render sentiency to the body during waking state and to the mind during dream state. So it is to be concluded that beyond body and mind, there is a conscious entity during the waking and dream states, in addition to the conscious ‘Entity X’ in the deep sleep state. It is obvious that the conscious entities in the three states have to be one and the same, otherwise he is burdened with three conscious entities, one not knowing the other two and possibly negating the other two entities. So it is concluded that the ‘Entity X,’ which is the witness in the deep sleep is the same entity rendering sentiency to the body/mind in the waking state and the mind in the dream state. Therefore the answer to the question ‘who am I?’ has to be this entity X witnessing the deep sleep state and reporting in the waking state, experiencing the dream (aware of the dream) and reporting in the waking state as well as aware of the activities of the waking state. The ‘Entity X’ is present continuously through all the three states of waking, dreaming or deep sleep. So ‘who is the Conscious Entity X?’ is the obvious question.

In summary, this body and mind are negated to be the ‘Real I,’ because they are both inert and the ‘Real I’ can exist even without the body and mind in the deep sleep state. So the ‘Real I’ – present continuously - is something other than the physical body and mind. The Conscious Entity X alone is present in all the three states and that alone can be the ‘Real I.’ That is the real He, for that existence continues to exist in the waking, dream and deep sleep states – it existed as a witness during the dream and deep sleep states and exists as a narrator (being self-aware) of the dream and deep sleep experience in the waking state. The ‘Real I’ and the witness conscious ‘Entity X’ have existence in all the three states – as the Conscious witness during the dream and deep sleep states and as the Sentient (conscious) during the waking state. This Conscious Entity X has to be the same in all human beings (as well as all other beings), because every person’s experience of deep sleep recalled in the waking state is the same – “I slept well and I was happy (if the Conscious Entity X is different in different people, they cannot report the same experience in the waking state).” This consciousness alone is present in the deep sleep state and the world does not exist. This Conscious existence – ‘Entity X’ - is called Ātmā in the Upaniṣads and is the Consciousness that is pervading the entire body and the entire universe.

This Conscious Entity X is described as the Ātmā (Self) in the Śāstra (scriptures) captured as follows -

From Liṅga Purāṇa,

यच्चाप्नोति यदादत्ते यच्चात्ति विषयानिह ।

यच्चास्ति संततो भावः तस्मादात्मेति कीर्त्यते ॥

yaccāpnoti yadādatte yaccātti viṣayāniha |

yaccāsti santato bhāvaḥ tasmādātmeti kīrtyate ||

The literal translation of the verse above reads as ‘That is called the ātmā, which pervades the sense objects here, takes (them), eats them, and the nature (or the existence) of which remains unbroken,’ - meaning 'Ātmā is that entity which in deep sleep is one with Brahman, in dream He captures sense objects without the help of sense organs, and in the waking state He experiences (empowers) the sense objects and He sustains ceaselessly.'

From Tattvabodha,

आत्मा कः?

स्थूलसूक्ष्मकारणशरीराद् व्यतिरिक्तः पञ्चकोशातीतः

सन्नवस्थात्रयसाक्षी सच्चिदानन्दस्वरूपः सन्

यस्तिष्ठति स आत्मा – तत्त्वबोधः

ātmā kaḥ?

sthūlasūkṣmakāraṇasharīrād vyatiriktaḥ pañcakośātītaḥ

sannavasthātrayasākṣī saccidānandasvarūpaḥ san

yastiṣṭhati sa ātmā - Tattvabodha

He is the Ātmā or the Self who is distinct from the gross, the subtle, and the causal bodies, who is beyond the five levels of experience (physical, vital energy, mind, intellect and bliss), being the witness of the three states of experience (waking, dream and deep sleep), that which IS Existent, Consciousness, and Limitless.

Then the answer to the question, ‘who am I?’ is the ‘Real I’ or the Ātmā experienced in all the three states – as the Conscious witness in the deep sleep state and as the Consciousness or awareness in the waking/dream states. So the Ātmā or Consciousness is the ‘Real I’ or the ‘Real He.’ If that be so, then what is the status of the physical body and the mind? The mind and body are the instruments to the ‘Real He’ or referred to as the costumes of the Ātmā. The body and sense organs are like the instruments to the Ātmā, like an instrument in the hands of a human being. The human being uses the appendage of mind as a tool while dreaming and uses the other appendage body as another tool in transacting in the world. These appendages exist for a period of time for him to experience the wakeful and dream states. Therefore that reality Ātmā or Consciousness is the existence in all three states and is the ‘Real He.’

The body and mind are the costumes of the Ātmā (or Self) and the Ātmā stands all alone. For example, a person’s real weight is his weight without his clothing. Similarly the real He is the Ātmā, who pervades the entire body, being a witness to the activities of the body and mind in the waking state – The Ātmā stands apart from the body and mind, in that the Ātmā is Consciousness, the body and mind being insentient; the body and mind are rendered sentient by the Conscious Ātmā, like the inert iron filings set in motion (rendered sentient) by the presence of a magnet. This is the ‘He’ standing alone. That is precisely the ‘He’ in deep sleep state.

What is Ātmā or Self – Ātmā is awareness. It is self-aware – It does not need the support of any other entity to be aware, unlike the sense organs, which need the support of the mind to cognize the object experienced and the mind needing the support of the Ātmā to interpret the information coming from the sense organs ( like every object needs the light for that object to be perceived, the light bulb does not need another light source to be perceived – the light bulb is self-effulgent, similar to the self-awareness of the Ātmā) ; the mind itself being inert, depends on the support of the Ātmā to function. Ātmā is not an entity which a person can cognize through his sense organs. Ātmā is the consciousness that makes aware the transactions of sense organs, mind, intellect etc. That Ātmā is the same everywhere. This awareness that Ātmā is everywhere is our experience every day in deep sleep (we don’t experience any limitation in deep sleep). In deep sleep, there is Ātmā and Ātmā alone. The moment the person wakes up from deep sleep, he connects with the appendages of body and mind and the Ātmā slips in to background, because the person’s interaction with the world is so strong, that the Ātmā is forgotten; in interaction with the world, the human being identifies himself with the body and mind - he attaches to the appendages and gets confused as to who he is! - He experiences a man, woman, tiger, lion, elephant, cow etc. etc. The appendages can be reckoned as the manifesting agents; the appendages manifest the Ātmā (like the hand or an object manifesting the light – light cannot be otherwise perceived). The appendages being insentient are not self-aware and cannot present themselves as sentient. It is the Ātmā that renders sentiency to the body and mind. In becoming sentient, the body and mind manifest the Ātmā. Like the Policeman’s uniform manifests that body as a policeman, the body and mind manifest the Ātmā and is called a ‘Manifested Ātmā’ (called Jīvātmā in the Vedantic literature) –

Why does this confusion – confusion of identifying body and mind as I - happen? Ācārya Śaṅkara describes with an example. Suppose an iron ball is thrown into a blazing fire, the iron ball becomes red hot. The ball is only characterized by its shape, being round in the example. Though the ball in itself is not characterized by heat, the iron ball in the fire becomes red hot, contacting the heat of the fire. On the other hand, the fire is characterized only by its heat, but the fire also assumes the shape of the ball – round red hot fire. So, though shape is not the inherent characteristic of fire and heat is not the intrinsic characteristic of the iron ball, in this context, the fire has borrowed the shape of the ball and the ball has contracted the heat of the fire – a mutual support of each other. Therefore, being in close contact, the fire and the ball appear to have mutually borrowed the characteristic of the other - the fire is conditioned by the iron ball and therefore appears round and the iron ball is conditioned by fire and appears red hot.

Likewise is the union of Ātmā and the body/mind; being in close proximity to each other, they appear to be conditioned by each other - the insentient body/mind and the Conscious Ātmā appear to borrow each other’s characteristics. In borrowing the Consciousness of the Ātmā, the insentient body-mind appears as sentient body /mind and the Conscious Ātmā, borrowing the transactions of the body/mind appears as a manifested Ātmā or Jīvātmā. The union of the body/mind and the Ātmā, either way appears as a single entity called the Jīvātmā or Manifest Ātmā. The union is recognized as a sentient human being.

Like for example, imagine pure water in different tubes of different colors; the colors of the tube impart different colors to the water in respective tubes. It is the same pure water present in all tubes – the different colored tubes manifest the water differently (of different colors). Likewise the man, woman, tiger, lion elephant, cow, sharing the same Ātmā, manifest the Ātmā as man, woman, tiger, lion, elephant, cow respectively. Ātmā is the conscious entity, offering sentiency to the body/mind complex, illuminating the body and mind; the illumination is a figurative expression, not the illumination like a lamp illumining the surroundings; yet the lamp illumining the surroundings is the perfect example to understand the role of Ātmā in the body. Imagine you are walking in to a pitch dark room and you are unable to see anything in the room; the moment the room is lighted by a lamp, the entire room along with its contents is perceived. Likewise, the insentient mind (not self-aware) is pitch dark without the Ātmā or Consciousness, but the Consciousness lights the contents of the mind – the mind becoming sentient – mind becomes aware; the Consciousness is the illuminator making the mind aware. The Consciousness being extremely subtle is not perceived by the sense organs or the mind (they are gross compared to the Consciousness). In this sense, the Consciousness is the illuminator of everything and everything else is a manifest of the Ātmā (because Ātmā cannot be perceived directly), like the sunlight is the perceiver of everything under the Sun – the presence of the Ātmā is inferred by the acquisition of sentiency in the body and mind (like the hand manifesting the light). In this sense the body and mind manifest the Ātmā and the body/mind complex is described as Jīvātmā or Manifest Ātmā. Different body appendages differently manifest the same Ātmā – the one and the same Ātmā appearing as different Manifest Ātmā. A tiger body is a Tiger Manifest Ātmā, a human body is a Human Manifest Ātmā etc. The same Consciousness manifests a man as dull, intelligent, angry, peaceful etc., depending upon the quality of the mind. Therefore in the spiritual context, the reference to ‘I’ does not identify the body, not the mind, but it is the Ātmā. The human being spiritually ignorant of himself, describes ‘I’ am the body, mind etc., yet involuntarily claims ‘my hand, my mind etc.’ on occasions – a clear reference to him admitting he is not the body or mind.

The Manifest Ātmā experiences the pleasures and pains of life and engages in actions to fulfill its desires – the fruits of its past actions, through the medium of the body. Over a period of time, the body becomes frail and becomes unable to meet the demands of the Manifest Ātmā. The Manifest Ātmā exits from the body (death – the subtle body leaving the body; the ātmā being eternal and all pervading, does not and cannot go anywhere; the Manifest Ātmā leaving the body is merely a complimentary saying or maneuver and does not mean so literally; all it means is that the manifestation has disappeared) and goes in search of another body to experience its store of karma and when it encounters such a body (birth), it continues its quest of experiencing the store of karma in the new body – a new manifest Ātmā.

This Ātmā is same everywhere means, standing at the Ātmā level, a person discards the appendages of other beings and sees only the Ātmā pervading that being also. He being established in Ātmā, sees only the Ātmā across him and when he sees the same Ātmā everywhere and all the times, there is no scope for grief and attachment – grief and attachment are products of differences; the attachment or hate arises out of seeing difference and removing the differences removes attachment and grief. Realizing this equanimity or sameness is the ultimate goal and purpose of life. It is this equanimity that liberates the person from the shackles of transmigration and this is expounded in the Bhagavad Gītā and the Upanishads. Recognizing and experiencing this sameness is the recognition and experience of the Self and this recognition and experience is Self-knowledge.

Recognizing this sameness is jñāna (Self-knowledge). So Kṛṣṇa therefore is stating in the second chapter, that only by jñāna a man can get rid of śoka and moha, because he sees only Self in all and duality disappears (only in his experience, not in physical space). The jñāni’s eyes still see the same objects that an ajñāni sees, but there is an internal transformation in him, through which all objects appear to him as Self. Therefore, in order to get rid of śoka and moha, this duality should be removed, for which “I have to recognize myself everywhere”). Such a person Kṛṣṇa calls as a Paṇḍita.

Kṛṣṇa refers to a Paṇḍita in a few instances in His instructions to Arjuna, the relevant one being as follows –

विद्या विनय संपन्ने ब्राह्मणे गवि हस्तिनि ।

शुनि चैव श्वपाके च पण्डिताः समदर्शिनः ॥ ॥५-१८॥

vidyā vinaya saṁpanne brāhmaṇe gavi hastini |

śuni caiva śvapāke ca paṇḍitāḥ samadarśinaḥ || ||5-18||

The spiritually wise called a Paṇḍita has the same-sightedness towards a highly evolved Brāhmaṇa, a cow, an elephant, a dog and dog-eater.

In the above verse are described living beings spanning a wide spectrum of evolution - from a highly evolved Brāhmaṇa to lowly evolved animals and the Paṇḍita is one who has same-sightedness in the entire breadth of spectrum of living beings like a cultured Brāhmaṇa , a cow, an elephant, a dog, and a dog eater . The word or verbal meaning of this verse defies clarity and one needs to understand the intended meaning of this divine statement. This intended meaning is what is described in the three states model, leading up to understanding who is a Paṇḍita. So a Paṇḍita having the same-sightedness towards all beings (sees himself in all – the same Ātmā pervading in all) is free of śoka and moha.

So this answers the question ‘Who am I?’ I am the eternal Ātmā pervading everywhere and the person who has experienced this state is a Paṇḍita also.

Question? email to sanatanadharmaUSA@gmail.com

The question will be answered in about a week and posted in the FAQ Tab.

If you provide e-mail, you will also receive the answer in your Inbox.